SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:06) We are more than willing, Mr. President, to answer any questions.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:10) Good afternoon, Mr. President, and to our esteemed colleague, Senator Kiko Pangilinan. May I have the privilege of asking some clarificatory questions to the one of the principal authors and the distinguished gentleman from Pampanga and the rest of the Philippines?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:00:27) Most willingly, to our minority leader and the gentleman from Taguig and Pateros. Thank you.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
Mr. President, with the permission of Senator Pangilinan, may I start by asking just some preliminary questions, just to set the tone and the environment. Let me start by saying that the gentleman is a friend.
(0:00:53) He helped my sister a lot when she was… the first time she ran for the Senate. In the last 10, 12 years, we have not agreed on many things on politics between me and the gentleman. Yet we have worked on many things together.
(0:01:15) Both of us had the privilege of being in the cabinet, him as presidential advisor on agriculture, myself on foreign affairs. But the most significant thing is that we are brothers in Christ, correct?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN::
(0:01:28) Amen.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:30) Yes. So I take that as a yes, the amen. So as brothers in Christ, we both believe that Jeremiah 29:11 is true. When God said, for I know the plans I have for you, plans to prosper you, not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future, that refers to the Philippines as it refers to other nations, correct?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:51) That is correct.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:53) Yes. And part of the future and hope that God is giving us is also to secure our territory. Am I correct there?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(2:05) That is correct.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(2:06) Yes. And also to secure the benefits of our sovereign rights.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(2:13) That is correct, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(2:14) And of course kasama rin po doon yung responsibility natin sa sovereign rights. For example, managing the ecosystem in the West Philippine Sea, South China Sea.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(2:22) That is correct, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:02:27) Mr. President, I know the answer to this, but let me ask it anyway. The gentleman from Pampanga, being from a city councilor to senator of this republic to a cabinet member, you do share the view that sending millions of Filipinos out of the Philippines because there’s no work here is not sustainable. We have to come to a turning point where there are quality jobs in our country, correct?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:02:55) That is correct, and I believe agriculture and fisheries modernization would be key to bringing our overseas Filipino workers back because that will be sustainable economic growth should we focus on agriculture and fisheries, Mr. President, as a path to modernization and sustainable economic growth.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:03:20) Actually, the gentleman answered my follow-up question because my follow-up question was that precisely that I know his passion for agriculture. I think that’s been a, what, 15, 20, 25-year passion of the gentleman.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:03:36) A decade and a half. About 15 years.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:03:38) And, of course, fisheries. Very, very much underestimated yung potential of fisheries. Of course, we can expand that to sana bumalik yung manufacturing. Sana ang ating pong mga creative whether yung mga gumagawa ng games, whether po yung ating mga fashion designers. Whether po yung ating mga visual artists o yung mga painters, sculptors. Sana magkaroon ng break world-wide. And that would also bring in the income and hopefully less of sending Filipinos abroad.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:03:54) Yes, agreed.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:04:18) So having said that, but while we do have more than 10 million Filipinos abroad, you do agree that it is our responsibility to look after their welfare?
(0:04:32) While they are there—the millions abroad. And I know the answer is obvious because the gentleman has always, has also stood up to protect and to defend our OFWs.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:04:40) That is correct, the OFWs no.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:04:45) And one way of protecting them is through diplomatic ties, correct?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:04:52) Definitely, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:04:54) So, Mr. President, would it be possible to have a problem with another country in one aspect of the relationship, but continue to grow your relationship on other aspects. So for example, you have a dispute on trade. But in terms of migration, you have very good agreements. In terms of scholarships or people-to-people relations maganda yan, ‘di ba. So pe-pwede po ba yun? Pe-pwede po bang may alitan, may dispute tayo sa isang country pero maganda pa rin ang relationships natin?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:05:16) In other aspects, Mr. President, yes, that is possible. In fact, the issues, for example, of Japan and China with respect to territorial disputes is separate and distinct from their trade relations, Mr. President. So, yes, these disputes can coincide with healthy relations in other aspects of trade, foreign exchange, cultural exchange, among others, Mr. President. That’s correct.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:06:21) So, Mr. President, these are all preliminary, and I hope you give me a little bit of latitude on it. But to go straight to the point, can we have good relationship with China despite our dispute in the West Philippine Sea and the South China Sea?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:06:38) Up to a certain extent, yes, definitely. We hope we could be able to distinguish between our territorial disputes as well as, for example, our desire for greater trade with China, Mr. President. We’d like to see something like that, yes.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:07:00) So I thank you for your answer, and I think it is perfectly correct because we do have very, very good relationships with Malaysia and Vietnam despite our dispute with them in the West Philippine Sea, the South China Sea. In fact, in Malaysia, we have two disputes.
(0:07:16) We have dispute in the West Philippine Sea, but we also have dispute about Sabah.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:07:22) That’s correct.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:07:24) Of course, they do not recognize that we do have a dispute regarding Sabah because as far as they’re concerned, there was a UN referendum and that’s done, di ba? So there can be a dispute despite the fact that the other side says, walang dispute, tapos na to.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:07:43) Well, yes, definitely. Yes.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:07:46) So, could it be possible, Mr. President, that marami saatin pare-pareho ang stand? To simplify, atin ‘to, atin ‘to.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:08:01) I will not go into the details that Senator Marcoleta went into, or his honor, or others, where you look at the legal basis of the different entitlements and territory. I think mahaba po yon. If you go to the Treaty of Paris, the amendments, the difference between territory and sovereign rights, mahaba yon.
(0:08:24) Would it be possible na pareho tayo ng stand, atin ‘to. Pero iba lang tayo ng approach kung paano ma-secure ang benefits ng atin ito.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:8:39) Definitely Mr. President, we are in a democracy, we can agree, but at the same time have differences in approaches Mr. President.
(0:08:49) We can agree on a fundamental principle that the exclusive economic zone, for example, of the Philippines has been ruled upon. We can agree that the arbitral ruling is a victory for us.
(0:09:10) But we can also disagree in terms of how to move forward in approaching China with respect to other considerations or other concerns.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:09:21) Mister President, let’s go a little bit to the arbitral ruling in a while. But thank you very much to the gentleman, to the principal author, Senator Kiko, especially Senator Bam, who we worked closely together in the previous Congress in the Rules Committee, yourself. We can disagree.
(0:09:41) On language, on culture, on approach, maybe even strategy, but I don’t want to go into strategy because the other countries are watching. Malaysia, Vietnam, China. We have a joint strategy with ASEAN, which is quite common knowledge, but then…
(0:10:00) ang problema when we talk about strategy in public nakikita rin ng kabila, but I guess there will be parts of it that we will, na dadaanan natin your Honor, but if ever there’s something deep about the strategy na dapat hindi in public, please just correct me or I will state that I will not discuss on that matter because I don’t think it will be in our interest to do so.
(0:10:27) I want to dwell muna dun sa point that we can agree and disagree, we can love the Philippines, protect our territory, secure the victory under UNCLOS, under the arbitral ruling, under international law, but yet magkakampi tayo.
(0:10:47) Pero kasi tignan niyo itong article na ‘to. Sabi po ng dating Secretary ng Presidential Advisors on Political Affairs “hold that tsinadors accountable”. So as far as he is concerned, anyone who did not sign the resolution is pro-China. I dare ask, do you agree, Your Honor?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:11:10) I do not agree. In fact, I manifested when we sponsored the measure that the final determination of whether you are for or against a resolution is not in the being an introducer but in voting, whether for or against the resolution, which comes after.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:11:31) Thank you for that, Mr. President, with a little bit of modification. Because if the resolution was like the resolutions in the 19th Congress, that was explicit on the Philippine official stand then we will be unanimous. But the resolution is on statements, not on our stand. That’s where, personal ko ‘to ah, this is not the whole minority. Yun ang gusto kong linawin. Ang resolution na ‘to ay tungkol sa sagutan ng mga opisyal ng Pilipinas at ng top diplomat na andito sa Pilipinas ng China. As far as I’m concerned, hindi ito tungkol sa stand natin. But this is the incredible thing, Mr. President.
(0:12:12) I remember the time that I hung out a lot with Senator Lacson. Doon ko natutunan na sa House kasi wala or iba yung terminology. Sa Senate meron OB. OB, official business. So kung may session tayo, pero let’s say may international conference, OB ka, official business. Or…
(0:12:39) We don’t allow hearings na kasabay ng plenary, but if there was something in Malacanang between the House, the Senate, or the Judiciary, the Senate, Malacanang, pwede ka magpa-OB. But there is another kind of OB, yung ‘oportunistang balimbing’. What do I mean by that?
(0:12:59) May I ask, Mr. President, honored gentleman, are you familiar with the stand of Secretary Llamas regarding the West Philippine Sea? It’s okay if you’re not. I’m just wondering if you’re familiar.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:13:13) I’m not familiar, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:13:20) Today, he’s one of the most ardent voices, the most firm voice about confronting China. At yung hindi mag-confront sa China ay Chinador or Pro-China. That’s a funny thing because before the arbitral ruling was filed, he sought me out. Sabi niya, Alan, mali approach ni Pnoy. Dapat kinakausap ang mga Chinese. Kung gusto mo, i-set up ko yung meeting between you and the Chinese ambassador. And he did.
(0:13:55) And then sabi niya saakin ‘Alan, ang Chinese may ibang kultura, kakausapin mo yan bilateral, hindi pwedeng multilateral. Isasama natin ang kano, mapapahamak tayo’. He told me that. He met me after the meeting with the Chinese ambassador. This was during the time of President Pnoy.
(0:14:19) I think in the arbitral award, if I’m not mistaken, Senator, you were still in the Senate, no? You weren’t in the cabinet yet, eh?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:14:27) No, no, I was no longer…
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:14:29) You were already… Yung award… Ah, 2016. No, we filed the…
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:14:36) The award was 2016.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:14:38) 2012, eh? 2012 yung standoff, eh? So you were still in the Senate, no?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:14:43) Yes, the first three years of my third term.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:14:46) So I was minority leader then. So by virtue of that, I was in the National Security Council. And Roland Llamas were looking for anyone and everyone who would listen to him to talk to whoever to convince President Pnoy not to file the arbitral case. Not to go.
(0:15:08) And to have bilateral talks. So let me just mention, Mr. President, that what is seen in public—in Facebook, in blogs—is very, very far from what is discussed in the halls of power and between professionals. I mean, here in Senate, we know where we disagree, we know where we will agree.
(0:15:34) So for example, if you talk about divorce, we will know who is pro and anti. So, yung pro, gusto niya mapasa yung batas na pwede ng divorce. Yung anti, ayaw. Meron namang pro-divorce, pero ayaw na no-fault divorce. Ibig sabihin, kailangan may grounds. So, masalimuot ang issues. Anong point ko doon, Mr. Chairman, Mr. President, Dear Senator Pangilinan?
(0:16:05) A issue this complex, we should simplify so that people, especially students, would know that, you know, we shouldn’t be, dapat walang divide and rule. Dapat hindi tayo magpabaya. Dapat always tayo on-guard. But is it productive na just because you don’t agree on a certain point, siya it’s pro-China, ikaw, ‘di ba? So let me ask you this question. Can you be pro-Philippines without being anti-China?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:16:39) Well, that’s a general proposition. So I will have to answer with a qualification, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:16:47) That’s okay, Mr. President. Ito naman, opinyon lang naman nating dalawa eh.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:16:53) It will be difficult to be out and out pro-China, especially when it comes to policies that affect our national interests. So I will have to qualify that you can be pro-Philippines without being anti-China as a general proposition. But when a conflict arises, obviously, between China’s interests and ours, then clearly we stand by the national interest.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:17:28) So, meaning, Mr. President, it’s like watching a basketball game between the Philippines and China. I’m pro-Philippines.
(0:17:38) And then, in the game, of course, I will cheer for the Philippines, but I don’t hate China. Diba? Pero dun sa specific interest natin. So, for example, if I have to negotiate a trade deal, I will be pro-Philippines. Diba? Now, if it can be a win-win, why not? So, ang point ko lang, Mr. President, unlike electoral politics, which is a zero-sum game, meaning if Senator…
(0:18:07) Villanueva runs for mayor of Taguig, and I run for mayor of Taguig. Only one will win. But in diplomacy, it’s not a zero-sum game. It’s a continuous dialogue, continuous communication, and it’s…
(0:18:25) There are times that we shout at each other. There’s times that you hate the situation. So I’m not even talking about being pro-China. So what I’m saying is that we deal with our problems with Vietnam, but we’re pro-Philippines, but we’re not anti-Vietnam.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:18:40) Nabanggit ni ginoong Minority Leader yung basketball. In fact, halimbawa, last Tuesday, natapos yung aming balitaktakan ni Senator Marcoleta. Nag dinner kami sa chinese restaurant. Hindi name ng mga kasamahan ko.
(0:19:03) So, Ibig sabihin, kahit na ba tayo ay naninindigan at hindi tayo sumasang-ayon sa naging patakaran o yung mga bitiyo na salita ng gobyerno ng China, paborito ko pa rin ng Chinese food.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:19:17) Yes. So, that’s a good example because that’s what I want to point out. Pareho tayo ng stand ‘atin ‘to’.
(0:19:24) Itong portions ng South China Sea, West Philippine Sea, na territory natin. Ako, mas radical pa stand ko. Hindi lang yung 12 nautical miles. Yung nasa Treaty of Spanish, atin din yun. Hindi natin pwedeng basta i-give up yun by international treaty. Some will disagree, some will agree. The Supreme Court case na final ni a brilliant man ni Professor Magallona will… ‘di ba na sabi niya eh sa UNCLOS bumawas yung ating territory eh.
(0:19:46) But we’re not here to discuss that now. We’re discussing, number one, yung sagutan ng opisyalis at nila. So I just wanna point that out, Mr. President, Senator Pangilinan, because we don’t want to be hitting each other kung pareho namang pala stand natin in terms of sovereign rights and sovereignty. Let it be oversimplified. Si Senator Imee kapitbahay natin dalawa. Co-owners tayo, may puno ng mangga sa gitna. Sabi ni Senator Imee sa kanya yun. Sabi natin dalawa sa atin yun.
(0:20:29) Tuwing nagbubunga, nag-aaway tayo. Ang problema, mas mayaman sa atin si Senator Imee. Ang problema, marami pong tangke, ereplano, pati sa pera, pati sa diplomacy, sa abogado, mas marami si Senator Imee. So ako, ang stand ko, makipag-usap tayo kay Senator Imee. Ikaw ang stand mo, hindi, sinisigawan na tayo, makipagsigawan na tayo. So we have the same stand.
(0:20:56) Mr. President, let me just finish the sentence.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:21:00) Yes, and I will clarify…
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:21:01) But ang pinag-uusapan natin, yung approach. Pero as so far as saying na itong puno ng mangga ay atin, pareho tayo.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:21:13) Pero hindi po nakikipagsigawan ang…
(0:21:17) I would not describe yung position taken by this representation as nakikipagsigawan. In fact, maganda yung point ng minority leader yung kanyang paghahambing na sila, ang China, maraming baril, maraming resources, maraming armamento, et cetera. At dahil nga dun, napakahalaga na ating isinusulong yung rule of law at yung ating sandigan ay yung international law. Hindi natin maaring labanan ng puwersa ang China. We cannot…
(0:21:59) fight in the area of brute force. And that’s why we are fighting in the area of the arbitral ruling, the UNCLOS, the rule of law, international law.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:22:11) Yes. I will not disagree with you. When I said sigawan, it was in the context of magkapitbahay, et cetera. Because, Mr. President, President Aquino and President Duterte had very different approach.
(0:22:25) President Aquino, at a certain point, to be fair to him, at a certain point, may bilateral na pag-uusap, but after the standoff sa Scarborough, nagkaroon po ng, for lack of a better word, we call it megaphone diplomacy. Di ba? Yung maingay sa media. But for the record, Mr. President, did we lose a single inch of territory or sovereign rights? Did we lose a single centavo during the Duterte administration?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:22:55) Well, according to the Department of National Defense, because this was tackled during the interpellation last week, that despite the Duterte administration’s positioning, the harassment did not stop.
(0:23:13) The water canoning did not stop. And therefore, and this is the situation, Mr. President. Hindi naman tumigil yung paghaharas, hindi rin tumigil yung pagwa-water cannon.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:23:32) Mr. President, we’ll speak about that. I-iibahin ko yun. Kasi ibang issue kung yung dispute was live at umaabot ba sa water cannon. Ang tinatanong ko, kasi during President Aquino’s time, it’s on the record. We lost control of Scarborough. We lost control. May miscalculations na nangyari. Instead of sending a coast guard ship, we sent a military ship, a navy, a gray ship, and then…
(0:23:58) Nagkaroon ng standoff and then kinontrol ng Chinese. So when President Duterte took over, that’s what we had to deal with, the threats that it will further escalate. So from the time that President Duterte took over, June 30, 2016, until the time he left, June 30, 2022, did we lose a single feature, a single square inch? Did we lose a part of our territory?
(0:24:27) I think it’s on the record, we did not.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:24:30) Well, if we did not lose any, then we thank the efforts of the past administration. But did we gain? Were we able to reverse the losses? I think not. Were we able to improve our trade? Direct investments, et cetera, I would say not so, not as robust in terms of other countries. So therefore, may plus minus din po, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:25:03) Well, let me answer that in two ways. First, I appeal to the records. We had more trade than during the Duterte, the Aquino administration, more bananas.
(0:25:15) Other fruits were allowed into China. The tourism went up. First time in our history, lumaban yung dami ng Chinese versus dumami ng Japanese. And then yung hindi nakakapangisda. Your staff, I have my support staff, you have your support staff. They can Google it. President Duterte announced that our fishermen can fish.
(0:25:39) Hindi lang pwede sa loob ng lagoon. And pati yun meron dahilan because spawning grounds yun eh. So hindi dapat magfish dun sa loob. Long story short, hindi nakakapagfish nun. Did we gain? That is now the challenge of the Marcos administration. And that’s why I have not commented whether I’m for or against because…
(0:26:00) His national security team knows more of what’s happening on the ground and ongoing pa yung kanilang strategy. Do I hope that they will gain? I think there are some gains in the Scarborough. Of course, I hope that they will gain. Kaya nga uulit-ulitin ko. Pareho stand natin, atin to eh.
(0:26:18) Yung approach natin ang iba. And tayo, nakakapag-discuss tayo, I will agree with you or disagree, you will disagree with me, but I will not call you hypocrite, pro-China, anti-China, anti-Philippines, ganyan. Because precisely, you know, when I was in the Foreign Affairs Department, kinwestyon ako ng Malaysian, Indonesian, Indonesian more of curiosity at Vietnamese. Bakit ganito yung strategy?
(0:26:47) Because nakikinabang sila sa strategy natin pag tayo maingay. But I got the shock of my life. Why? Because when I actually became foreign secretary, the funds from the United States for the South China Sea, mas malaki ang nakukuha ng Vietnam kaso sa Pilipinas. Ginera nila ang Vietnam, tinalo sila. Tayo, treaty ally, mas malaki. Before the…
(0:27:15) administration of President Duterte, binigyan ng same kind of ship or sea craft ang Taiwan sa Pilipinas. Yung sa kanila may weapon system, may communication system. Sa atin walang weapon system. So, Mr. President, what I’m saying is that pareho tayo ng stand. Pareho natin mahal ang Pilipinas. Pareho natin gustong…
(0:27:42) makinabang ang bawat Pilipino ang anak ng anak ng anak ng anak ng anak ng anak natin. You know, President Cory, in her visit to China, actually started the discussion on this. So it’s not new. So if you have comment, Mr. President, then can I move, can I have just a few more preliminary? Go ahead, Mr. President.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:28:03) Just very quickly on the Scarborough Shoal incident. Precisely because of this Scarborough Shoal incident, the Aquino administration proceeded to file the case before the International Tribunal a few years later. I think one year or several months later. And we won, thankfully. And in that regard, we placed on record that the nine-dash line of China is illegal, according to the UN clause.
(0:28:38) That they’re setting up building destruction of the reefs.
(0:28:46) And building artificial islands and runways was violative of our EEZ. And that alone gave us a strong footing. So strong in the sense that moving forward several years later, about 60 countries have recognized the 2016 ruling that favored precisely the Philippine position.
(0:29:13) And counting. So I’d like to think that yes, that incident in Scarborough was most unfortunate that it led to that. But because of that incident, we, as a smaller nation, decided that the way to…
(0:29:34) addressing the challenge of a bigger nation—more powerful nation, is by way of the rule of law, by international law.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:29:45) Yes, Mr. President. But there were many things that happened in between. One, we made the mistake of sending a gray ship. Number two, if the records I read is correct, we made the mistake of relying on back-channeling and alleged until now walang confirmation or denial kung totoong nag mediate ang america at sinabing ‘pag umalis yung ships niyo, aalis din yung chinese ships, umalis yung ships natin, hindi umalis chinese ship.
(0:30:00) So I leave that to history to judge. But one question on the arbitral ruling. Is it a total victory or mayroon din parts na nagka-problema tayo?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:30:24) Well, there is this concern that, which was already raised previously, that because the Kalayaan group of islands is not within the EEZ, then it creates some questions regarding our sovereign rights and sovereignty over the KIG, but it can be argued…
(0:30:51) that in the same way, for example, Guam is not within the EEZ of the United States, it is still U.S. territory.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:31:00) Medyo exhausted po naman ang inyong talakayan ni Senator Marcoleta, I’ll just try to summarize it in one line. Yung nangyari kasi doon, cliname natin na China cannot claim a group of features as one unit that generates entitlements and rights, right? Di ba.
(0:31:24) But tayo, cliname natin yung KIG as a group. That’s why last minute lang nalaman nung lawyer natin. But as I said, exhausted kayo. Maraming hindi nakakaalam, I think this is where it’s upsetting to scholars. Because I got the shock of my life, before I went to DFA, I attended seminars, international seminars. Ito yung mga track 2, mga professors. Tinanong nga ako ng isang professor ‘Sir, did you win the arbitral award?’, of course, sagot ko ‘yes’ but I knew it was sort of a trick question.
(0:32:00) So he asked me, sa Scarborough, didn’t you used to arrest Chinese fishermen? Yes. Didn’t you used to arrest Vietnamese fishermen? Yes. Ano ba ang sinabi sa award? Sabi sa award, it is recognized as traditional fishing ground of all three. Chinese, Filipinos, Vietnamese. So ngayon, hindi na natin sila pwedeng arestuhin. So hindi rin totoo.
(0:32:29) Na parang Biblia as far as we are Christians is concerned, that every part of the Bible is true. May mga naging kahinaan din itong agad-agad natin pagpunta sa arbitral ruling. Kaya in resetting, resetting our problem in Scarborough, hindi na natin mababalik sa before Pnoy’s time or before the standoff because na-stop na tayo ng ruling ng sa arbitral court.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:33:04) But in the conceding that may be the case in terms of us arresting other fishers from other nations, the fact that there was a recognition that these are traditional fishing grounds for all means that China is now doing illegal acts.
(0:33:27) By water canoning our fisher folk who are in the area, Mr. President. So in that regard…
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:33:34) Mr. President, that was clear even before. But before, pwede natin sila arestuhin. Ngayon, hindi na natin sila pwedeng arestuhin. Dati, pag-EEZ natin, kailangan nila ng fisheries agreement kung hindi pwede natin silang arestuhin. Parang Papua New Guinea.
(0:33:50) Sa ngayon doon na tayo kumukuha, not all but Tuna, kumukuha tayo sa EEZ nila. Pero may fishing agreement. Sa ibang parts ng EEZ natin, we can still arrest…
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:34:03) Yes.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:34:04) But not in in Scarborough, but that’s not my point. My point is, we can discuss soberly as patriotic Filipinos how to navigate this and secure our territory.
(0:34:18) And also, benefit from all of this, from our sovereign rights, without saying you’re pro-China, you’re anti-China, senador ka, etc. And the funny thing is, Mr. Llamas was correct on that point. Because sinasabi niya hindi naman pinag aralan lahat, iba iba yan. Iba yung stand natin sa Ayungin, iba stand natin sa KIG, kaya lang ngayon biglang balimbing na. Biglang totally siya ang Mr. Philippines no.
(0:34:47) Mr. President, who was the first to start reclaiming in the South China Sea?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:35:05) At least from the Philippine…
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:35:08) What country, Mr. President?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:35:15) Our DND resource person says that it was Malaysia that started claiming.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:35:23) And of the claimant countries, sinong pinaka-aggressive? I’m not talking about one month, one year.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:35:33) China.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:35:33) In the last 20 years, China.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:35:35) Yes.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:35:37) Okay. Sino pinaka maraming reclamation?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:35:37) As of today, Vietnam, according to the DND, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:35:51) What country offered the United States not to militarize the reclamations, etc.?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:36:05) Yes, according to our resource person, it was President Ramos who first requested not to militarize the area, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:36:20) Okay, not bad yung taga DND, sir. You got one out of four questions correct. Not bad. The first to reclaim was Vietnam.
(0:36:31) The most aggressive to reclaim in most islands is Vietnam. The most aggressive is Vietnam. The country to first propose to President Obama not to militarize, na hindi tinanggap ng American government, is China.
(0:36:50) President Xi was still vice-president there. It’s recorded in many, many books. I recommend you read Mahobani, a great diplomat, a great professor of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Government. Instead of saying yes, they continued to send their navy ships because of the freedom of navigation. And China…
(0:37:15) Reacted the same way that U.S. reacted to missiles on Cuba. So the next question, Mr. President, inside our EEZ, sino ang pinakamaraming reclamation?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:37:33) Right now, it is, as I made to understand, it is Vietnam.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:37:38) Okay. Sinong pangalawa?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:37:42) Again, according to our DND resource person, China is the second.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:37:48) Mali po, it’s Malaysia. So, tama ako, Malaysia.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:37:59) Kasi, Malaysia has five. Well, if he considers… The one by Taiwan, because of the one China policy, then tied ang Malaysia at China. May I know if militarized, itong mga ni-reclaim ng Vietnam at saka ng Malaysia?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:38:39) Yes, according to our resource persons in Vietnam, there are military personnel and officers.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:38:48) So, military personnel but hindi militarized?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:38:53) Well, yes, not in the context of the Chinese. Yes, not in the relative to Malaysia.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:39:25) Mr. President, I’m looking for the pictures, but I don’t know if hindi lang authorized representative niyo sa DND. Ang features ng Vietnam at Malaysia are may missile silos, may military ships, may radars. I showed it already in this session hall eh. So hindi totoo na hindi militarized ang Vietnam at Malaysian features. I’m trying to look for the pictures. Is it there? Yeah, that one. Can you show that, please? That’s a part two. Mr. President, during the time of President Duterte, while they are readying the pictures, palaging inuulit ni Justice Carpio, kapag hindi ka nag protest, nalulusaw…
(0:40:27) I don’t know his exact term, pero maapektuhan daw claim natin. Did you hear that noise during that time?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:40:35) I may have picked it up, Mr. President. I’m not sure exactly when he said that. There were a number of times.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:40:41) He, together with many advocates, kept on saying whether I was foreign minister doon o hindi, pagka hindi ka nag protest, parang saatin sa domestic law diba na parang ‘pag 30 years, yung lupa walang titolo, uninterrupted, walang nagke-claim, nagkakaroon ng latches or nae-estoppel ka.
(0:40:49) Is there a personnel from DFA here?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:41:09) Yes.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:41:11) Maybe he would like to…
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:41:13) He probably used to work for you.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:41:15) So let me ask that question. Is the principle of estoppel or of laches applicable to what we are contesting or what we are fighting for in the South China Sea? So tama ba si Justice Carpio na pag hindi tayo nag protest, mawawala yan?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:41:34) As a general principle, the resource person says yes, latches may, over time, affect our claims, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:42:00) Maybe we have to correct that, Mr. President. Napakadelikado ng statement na yun. Alam nyo bakit? Kasi nung panahon ni President Aquino, and even during the Duterte time, we did not protest Vietnam and Malaysia. So kung tama yung sinasabi ni Justice Carpio, wala na tayong claim. Sa…
(0:42:26) 38 features ng China na kine-claim nila. Ang na sa loob ng EEZ natin, apat. Sa 24 na kine-claim ng Vietnam, na sa EEZ natin, 11. Tapos yung Malaysia may 5. Taiwan, yung ito island na sa loob. Hindi natin prinotest yun, Mr. President.
(0:42:50) So, let’s dispel that malicious political statement because it is not a legal proposition. Wala sa UNCLOS ang Laches atsaka Estoppel. Wala po doon. Hindi, ibang iba yung law of the sea sa law of land. Sa land, pag walang titolo, tapos si Sec Gen, lalo kung yung lupa na iyon ay na sa Batangas, and meron siyang constituent na nandoon 30 years. May tax deck siya. Walang nagke-claim, uninterrupted. Pwedeng titolohan, pag biglang ako kapitbahay niya, 1 year later sabihin akin yan, hindi na pwede, may estoppel na eh, may latches na. Hindi totoo yun sa law of the seas. Kahit isang libong taon, kahit bumangon yung mga mummies doon sa mga pyramid sa egypt. Atin pa rin yun.
(0:43:48) Mr. President. I mean, we don’t have to debate it today courtesy if the DFA wants to answer that. But if that is their answer, and that wasn’t their answer to me when I was secretary, because I asked everyone in the DFA, I asked them, kung tama si Justice Carpio at hindi nag protest during that time—of President Aquino, we will file the protest now. So hindi kailangan.
(0:44:16) At saka, sir, pag nag-protest ka sa Vietnam at Malaysia, sila tayo magkakampi ngayon kasi mas malaki ang China. Tayo sa ASEAN ang nag-uusap-usap. So hindi naman pwedeng iba yung rule sa China, iba yung rule sa Malaysia at Vietnam. In terms of legal, Mr. President.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:44:33) In terms of legal, that’s correct.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:44:35) In approach, I…
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:44:35) In terms of realities, we do have to do…
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:44:38) In certain realities, like for example, the water cannons, di ba?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:44:39) Yes.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:44:42) So Mr. President, ito example. He’s on reef. My eyes isn’t as good as it used to be, but… I read the radar. I see the battle tank. Go to the next slides para lang makita. Oh, ito. Bailang K.
(0:45:12) So makikita nyo po dyan, meron pong bunker, meron pong gun shelter, meron pong open, ayan, may battle tank, may lighthouse, may speed boats, may pier. Next slide.
(0:45:43) The Simcoe East Reef, if I’m pronouncing it right, ha? Meron tong three-sweep twisted blade turbine for power. May battle tank. May 12.7 mm HMG. Concrete bunkers. At the time I got this, and President Duterte allowed me to show it, ongoing pa yung construction nila. Next, Vietnam, Pugad Island.
(0:46:13) Sa Pugad Island may battle tanks, may anti-aircraft artillery. So, let me ask the DND representative, through, of course, your gentleman, ang mga eroplano ba natin, helicopters, or coast guard, dumidikit sa mga island na occupied ng vietnam?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(46:41) Hindi raw tayo dumidikit.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:46:41) Yes, and that is why Walang water cannon. That is why hindi natin napapanood sa balita yung you are in Vietnamese territory, move out. Because iniiwasan natin yung sa Malaysia at Vietnam. That’s not the only reason, Mr. President. Kasi nga, hindi iniiwasan ng China ang sierra madre. Sila mali don, tama tayo don. I don’t contest that. This is my point, Mr. President. We’re not being totally truthful to the Filipino people of what’s happening sa West Philippine Sea, South China Sea. And us…
(0:47:20) We strengthen to face China. Malaysia and Vietnam are also strengthening. I don’t know if the resource person from DND has the information. How many submarines does Vietnam have?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(47:42) There are a number.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:47:45) And how many does Malaysia have?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:47:49) Also, there are…
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:47:51) I’m sorry, sir. I know you don’t have it offhand, but enough to say na marami. How many Philippines has? Except, hindi kasama yung kay Chavit na submarines na ginagamit niya sa Ilocos. How many submarines does the Philippines have?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:48:07) According to the DND, we have no submarines, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:48:12) So in long story short, we don’t really have a strategy except the transparency strategy against China. But more so, we don’t have that concrete strategy against Vietnam and Malaysia.
(0:48:27) Although we’re friendly, Vietnam and Malaysia, as seen in all of this, have a strategy against the Philippines. In this last one, tignan mo po yung kway. Tignan niyo po yung landingan nila. Dun sa Pugad Island. Let’s go very fast, with your permission, just to show you the Malaysian. Let’s go to the Malaysian. Ayan. So, yan ang example po. May runways na rin sila.
(0:48:58) Next slide. Swallow reef. Next slide. So anyway, let’s stop there. But the point I want to make, Mr. President, is… kailangan natin magkaisa sa issue na ito. Atin ‘to. And some wants to make it a political issue, sila pro-china kami anti… hindi po. Pare-pareho tayong Pro-Philippines. Pero may mga detalye na kailangan pag-usapan natin ng husto.
(0:49:17) So I’ll go straight to the resolution unless you want to just react. To the resolution, Mr. President, is it correct that ang pinagmulan nito ay yung presentation ni Commodore Tariella na may depiction in caricature or whatever the right name is of President Xi sa presentation niya? Ito ba yung pinagmulan nito?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:50:00) I think that may be one of the issues raised, but I don’t think it began with that, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:50:12) Mr. President, bago po yung Chinese Ambassador eh. So, all the disputes with the former ambassador, kung meron man, was covered by the 19th Congress. Kompleto naman tayo ng resolution. So, lumala ito nung nagkaroon ng caricature regarding the president of China. So, asan yung side-by-side?
(0:50:44) So, siguro ito yung question ko. With your permission, Mr. President, Senator Pangilinan, let’s focus on Commodore Tariella muna no. Let me state this for the record muna ah. I don’t doubt his patriotism. I don’t doubt his contribution to the cause. At lahat ng ginawa niya na opisyal at tama, wala akong problema.
(0:51:09) This is one picture, pero nasaan yung picture ni President ng ASEAN ba yun or APEC? Hindi, yung nilapitan niya bigla si President Xi. Meron ka nun diba. Ito muna, ito muna. Ano sa dalawa ang opisyal ng Pilipinas? Yung nag-usap tayo, nag-debate tayo, ipaglaban natin yung atin, pero sa simbolo ng watawat at sa simbolo ng Pangulo ng bawat bansa—cordial tayo. Or ang official ba natin ay umikot tayo, at gumawa tayo ng mga caricature, at siraan natin ang image ng presidente ng kabila? Which is our official policy?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:51:52) If I may just clarify, Mr. President, because the mention of the caricature. Mr. President, according to the information, the caricature came out January 14th.
(0:52:03) But even before that, Mr. President, I publicly came up with a statement expressing concern about the military exercises, live military exercises undertaken by China in the Taiwan Straits. That was in December. And there, Mr. President, I was called out by the Chinese embassy spokesperson saying, reminding me that I should respect the one-China policy. And so the issue of Tariella cannot be isolated, Mr. President. And therefore, if I answer this, it is simplifying, Mr. President, the whole resolution into Tariella’s statements. No, it’s not, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:52:50) Mr. President, I’ll go to the one China policy later on and why you were called out. Because if you remember, the president himself was called out.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:53:00) Exactly, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:53:02) No, because that’s their duty.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:53:03) Well, and this is our duty to respond.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:53:04) Yes.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:53:04) Mr. President, yes.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:53:06) Yes, it’s your duty to respond, Mr. President.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:53:09) To uphold the rights, to uphold our independence, to uphold our freedom of speech, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:53:15) Yes, Mr. President, but…one of the red lines of China in their diplomatic relations with any country, including the United States, is the one China policy. That’s why when the Speaker of the House of U.S. went to Taiwan, they were called out. And there was no issue. And they called…
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:53:32) Mr. President,
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:53:33) …let me finish. And they called, and there was a debate. When President Bongbong said we have to prepare, President BBM.
(0:53:42) Nag statement, nag statement. Wala namang issue eh. Ito stand natin, ito stand nila.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:53:51) Except that, Mr. President, my experience with Chinese statements, Mr. President, is that they tend to be inaccurate or they tend to make wrong, false accusations. Mr. President, I was chairperson of the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats. Our organization was blacklisted by China. And the accusation was that the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats, of which I was chairperson, was supporting Taiwanese independence, which was a lie, Mr. President. So I have had experience with Chinese public statements that are false because it serves their interests to promote their one-China policy. We respect their one-China policy. When I expressed concern about the military, live military exercise, I did not speak about Taiwan’s independence or I did not speak about at least from my point of view, it had nothing to do with the one China policy. We were just expressing concern that the live military exercises are creating tension and escalating tension in our region. There was no mention of one China policy. And then they come in and remind me…
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:55:22) Mr. President, that is a standard reminder because they consider Taiwan and the waters in between to be part of China. So, put it another way, Mr. President. Sa kainitan ng secession movement ng Mindanao, kung may statement ang isang opisyal ng China…
(0:55:42) Dahil nagpadala tayo ng military sa marawi, hindi ba ang diplomats natin sa Beijing, sasabihin sa kanila, huwag kayong makiaalam. Kasi one-Philippines ‘to eh. Ang Mindanao ay hindi…
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:55:54) Mr. President, I beg to disagree with the comparison. I think, again, at least at… Chantol, Mr. President. Iba yung sitwasyon dun sa Mindanao. Iba naman yung sitwasyon dito sa Taiwan Straits, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:56:12) Mr. President, that’s a very, very…
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:56:14) For example, we have about 200,000 overseas Filipinos in Taiwan. And so these live military exercises are a concern because an accident could lead towards, you know, a shooting war, which we would…
(0:56:33) For the sake of our Filipinos overseas, we would like to ensure that nothing like that happens.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(56:39) No, I agree with you, Mr. President. And I agree with your statement, and I agree na sana hindi i-invade yung Taiwan. What I’m saying is it’s the duty of their diplomats na sumagot.
So if there were 200,000 Chinese in Mindanao, and we had live exercises i-invade Marawi, yung ating diplomat ay aangal pa rin sa Beijing because it’s their duty. But to move on from that, Mr. President. Okay. Going back to Commodore Tariella. Sa resolution niyo kasi nakalagay dito eh In their performance of the official duties. So, tinanong ng Ambassador ng China sa…
(0:57:21) DFA, official ba yan? Which is tama and normal. So if in Beijing, yung isang general doon ay maglabas ng caricature ni BBM, ipare-recall natin yung ambasador natin doon pag hindi siya nagtanong, nag-protest na bakit, at pag hindi sinabing official ba yan. Kasi yung Pangulo natin takes effort and time for good relations despite…
(0:57:50) the dispute, tapos yung heneral, naka uniporme pa siya on official time, will show this caricature. So, my point, Mr. President, is naghahalo-halo kasi itong resolution na ‘to eh—kung anong tama’t mali. Let’s assume, I will not grant because hindi ko alam yung statements niyo, Mr. President. I have to admit that, okay. Pero naghahalo rin statements ni Tariella.
(0:58:13) We cannot pass this resolution saying that Commodore Tariella is correct because he’s wrong. If he just simply stated, I love the Philippines, I will fight for our territory, I’ll fight for our sovereignty rights, I will do my duty, but sorry, dahil uminit ulo ko, nilabas ko ‘to pero hindi official yan, tapos na tayo.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:58:35) We beg to disagree, Mr. President, that Mr. Commodore Tariela is mistaken.
(0:58:39) We would not have put this resolution and authored it if we failed Mr….
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:58:44) That’s what I want to elicit. So the authors of this resolution is saying, Pwede. So kung ang official ng presidente is to have certain decorum sa presidente ng China, pwede yung isang general hindi sumunod. Ang sa kanya, bastusin natin yung Pangulo ng isang bansa.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:59:01) Mr. President, that is his interpretation?
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:59:03) No, no, no. Bastus yun.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:59:04) No, that is your interpretation.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:59:05) No, no, no. So if I ask them now…
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:59:06) Mr. President, we beg to disagree.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:59:08) Can you show the slide?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:59:11) Mr. President, we beg to disagree. The Department of National Defense has issued…
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:59:13) Mr. President, tignan nyo naman po.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:59:14) …has issued a statement condemning China’s remarks, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:59:19) Mr. President, if you look at the DFA, it was also telling Tariella, but not directly. It was saying, follow the decorum, Mr. President. Mr. President, kung ganyan ang stand natin, then my staff now can show a meme of you.
(0:59:34) Mr. President, let me ask that question.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:59:37) Mr. President, I am not from China. Why will your staff put a meme towards you?
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:59:41) No, it’s not about China. It’s about the forum.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(0:59:44) You’re comparing apples and oranges, Mr. President. You are simplifying what is complicated, not international.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:00:31) I think we were just making a point. I will speak after him.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:00:38) Mr. President, I have made my point. Just for the record also, the resolution does not make mention of the caricature, so I’m not sure where the point of the caricature is being pointed out.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:00:55) I will go there after this point, Mr. President. Sir President, Rule 93, acts and language which offend a senator or any public institution shall be deemed parliamentary.
(1:01:08) From kindergarten, Mr. President, we are taught certain rules. How to address the teacher. How to respect your neighbor. Paano i-address yung matatanda, di ba? Ganun din po sa international affairs. You do not mess with their flag and you do not mess with their symbol of authority, their king, sultan, Prime Minister or President. That’s why in this slide, Mr. President, it is very clear, yung official natin is, despite any dispute, President Zelensky at President Putin, if you put them on the same room, magkakamayan yan. So that’s why the question kay Commodore Tariella is, officially sanctioned ba yan? Which tama natanungin ng Chinese ambassador, bakit?
(1:02:04) If a general in China makes a caricature of President Bongbong, dapat i-protest ng ating ambassador. At dapat tanungin, official ba yan? Because we cannot look underhanded pag dating po sa international community.
(1:02:27) Hindi pwedeng ang pangulo, makikipag usap, na ito walang personalan, and then yung heneral mo, personal. So, I’m sorry I reacted because anyone who sees the caricature is not a flattering caricature. If I do that caricature to any world leader, any world leader, kahit dito. The majority leader is smiling.
(1:02:53) The majority leader and I had a bad… We’ve known each other since 98. We’ve never argued with raising our voice. But… But umabot. I didn’t even remember what I said. We apologized to each other. Bakit? Mali eh. Mali eh. Pero tama yung pinaglalaban mo, bro. Tama pinaglalaban ko. Mali yung paraan paano natin pinaglaban. So wala kong problema sa… pinaglalaban ni Commodore Tariella. Pero hindi naman tayo fraternity dito sa Pilipinas na mali na nga brod mo, pero dahil bugbugan sa ibang bansa, sasabihin mo, tama brod mo. Mali eh. Mali.
(1:03:37) I don’t propose a resolution, but the guy should apologize and just say, na, tama pinaglalaban ko pero mali na ginawa kong ganyan. Now if he wants to that, he resigns his commission.
(1:03:46) He can go around, he can join the media, he can be a blogger, he can be a professor, he can be like Ronald Llamas and call himself an influencer or a political analyst. But when you’re in uniform, the other countries will ask you, official ba yan. That’s standard, Mr. President.
(1:04:09) Kaya tayo nagkakaproblema.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:04:12) Mr. President, wala namang problemang magtanong sila. Pero itong mga bitiw na salita nila sa kanilang Facebook official pages ay hindi katanggap-tanggap. Number one. Number two, kahit sa China, Mr. President, kina-caricature ang ating Pangulo ng state-controlled, China state-controlled media. Na alam natin, walang lumalabas dyan na hindi aprobado ng Communist Party. So merong China, Sinwan News…
(1:04:39) Andito si BBM, may caricature, andito rin. So maliwanag, Mr. President, they too, through their official channels, come up with caricatures, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:04:53) Sir President, with all due respect, Senator Pangilinan, and dapat ina-advise ng DFA ng tama, hindi po mangga sa mangga o atis sa atis yan. Communist countries, including Vietnam, Cuba, North Korea, pag news outlet nila, although alam natin in reality may say sila…
(1:05:14) Just like PTV4, in reality, hindi dapat, but in reality, kahit sinong administrasyon ay may say sa PTV4, is not considered track one. Hindi siya track one. So kung hindi ka track one, pwede ka mag-carikature. Media yun eh. Kahit na alam ng Communist Party. So if you ask, if our diplomat ask, is that official? Sasagutin ka, that’s our news. Hindi kami.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:05:42) Which is, Mr. President, and therefore, okay lang.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:05:46) No, it’s not okay lang. It’s not okay lang, Mr. President.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:05:52) When we defend our officials’ caricature, it’s not okay. But when they’re state-controlled news caricatures, it’s okay?
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:06:01) No, Mr. President.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:06:02) Eh yun naman pala eh, so what’s the issue?
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:06:03) No, Mr. President. There is an international order in foreign relations. And when these countries that control state media do it, it is accepted that it is not track one. But when democratic countries have generals who do that, it destroys the order.
(1:06:25) Nagmumukha tayong childish at bata, nasisira po ang kredibilidad mula sa Pangulo hanggang sa Secretary of Foreign Affairs. Kung sila hindi sila napapahiya sa ginagawa ng state news, tayo napapahiya. Kasi walang maniniwala na galing… gagawin ng heneral yan at hindi siya ipagso-sorry, tapos sasabihin hindi siya opisyal.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:06:53) Well, again, Mr. President, if taken in isolation, and that’s the difficulty here, the good senator is taking it in isolation. That was January 14. December pa lang, pinuntirya na ako. Si Senator Risa Hontiveros, the same. Nung nag-statement ang…
(1:07:17) Congressman Leila and Congressman Diokno, tinira rin. So, itong propensity to focus on Tariella because nagre-reclama on China, hindi, it does not present the entire picture, Mr. President. This resolution would not have happened if it was just Mr. Tariella, Commodore Tariella they were complaining about.
(1:07:38) But precisely, it is a systematic propaganda campaign to discredit our public officials, to discredit our armed forces, Mr. President. Ganyan ang style. And the statement of the DND, if you look at it, if you read through it…
(1:07:57) They were saying, and they condemned the lies. Mr. President, they described it as lies, ang nilalabas ng China. And then dito tayo, nagre-reklamo sila dahil dito sa caricature. Eh sana naman medyo patas tayo dahil… dito naman tayo saatin, Mr. President. Suportahan naman natin yung ating Coast Guard. Sila ang tumataya jaan eh. At suportahan natin ang DND at ang ating men in uniform. Yan ang ating kagustuhan, para maipasa itong resolution na ito, that we stand behind our men in uniform. We oppose and we condemn the lies, the disinformation, and the maligning being undertaken by China against the Senators, against Congressmen, against our men in uniformF. Mr. President, ganun lang ka simple ito. Hindi na dapat pinahahaba pa at pinatatagal pa ‘to, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:08:56) Mr. President, that’s his opinion that hindi pa ito pwedeng pahabain pa. This affects OFWs. This affects our ailing economy.
(1:09:06) This affects our being a Christian nation. This affects, moral ascendancy. Hindi mo pwedeng sabihin, dahil mali kayo, mali na rin gagawin ko. Dahil ang Coast Guard tama, yung isang general na nang bastos, okay. So I take offense, sasabihin, dito naman kayo sa amin. Protektahan nyo naman Coast Guard. Kailan namin hindi protektahan ng Coast Guard, Mr. President?
(1:09:30) We are for the Coast Guard, Mr. President. But if one of their generals went over the line and did something that is wrong, childish, undiplomatic, reckless, unprofessional, it’s also our duty. Did we file a resolution here? To ask someone to correct him? Hindi po. Kasi hindi na namin kailangan ng resbak ng Senado. Kapag kami nakikipag-debate, sa Russian ambassador, American ambassador, hindi namin kailangan resbak ng Senate.
(1:10:03) Especially kung tama kami. But what we’re asking sa resolution to is resbak ng buong Senado. Which I’ll go to the other point because hindi tayo magkasundo dyan. So tingin nyo tama, bahala kayo. Because may mga anak kayo, may mga apo, tayong lahat. Dadating tayo dyan. Pwede mo ba sabihin sa anak mo, anak, pag mali sila, gumawa ka na rin ng mali. Anak, okay lang mang bastos kasi mas bastos sila. Anak, okay lang mag-bully kasi mas bully sila. Ako, hindi ko sasabihin yun. Ako, sasabihin ko…
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:10:31) At hindi yun na sinasabi ko.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:10:33) Hindi, yun na sinasabi mo, Mr. President, and I’m not yet finished.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:10:35) No, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:10:35) Kasi you said tama sa Tariella.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:10:38) We beg to disagree, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:10:39) I’m not yet finished.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:10:40) Well, we beg to disagree.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:10:40) So, Mr. President, this is the question. The resolution question statement. Sabi dito, whereas, in response to the public statements of the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China, etc., etc., walang naka-attach kung anong statements nila.
(1:10:58) So, paano tayo magde-debate dito? That’s why, mahaba ito eh. Mga pang tatlong araw ito. Iniisa-isa ko yung statements. Pinapakuha ko sa staff. Nagsimula lang ako kay Tariella because tinitignan ko statements ni Senator Risa. I think that’s within her rights. She’s been consistent with some of her… I may agree or disagree, but yun ang statement niya. I’ve been looking at the statement of the gentleman from Pampanga. You’re a senator, you’re a patriot. But yung kay Tariella, nakita ko kaagad eh.
(1:11:26) Tama yung iba niyang mga statements pero mali yung ginawa niya na ganyan ang gagawin mo. Kasi pag ginawa kay President Bongbong yun, regardless kung opposition ako o administration, pagtatanggol ko siya. Dahil mali eh. Ang mali is mali. Hindi pwedeng mali sila. Mali na rin tayo. Tama sila. Tama tayo. May tama tayo niyan. So Mr. President, this is the question. How will we discuss and vote on this? Kung wala naman dito yung statements na kune-question natin.
(1:11:56) So will the gentleman attach these questions and furnish the members of this chamber? I don’t think we ever passed a resolution. This is just one. 30 seconds, tapos na ako. On this point, we’ve never passed a resolution condemning anything without specifying what we’re condemning.
(1:12:17) So, pwede bang sabihin, hindi ko gusto yung sinabi ni Sen. Marcoleta sa CA. Hindi po. I saw the statement of Sen. Lacson. I saw the other statements. Spinecify nila kung ano sinabi niya. Nakita ko statement ni Sen. Marcoleta. Kina-clarify niya. At least malinaw. Eh, ito parang carte blanche na lang. Lahat ng sabihin ng Chinese Ambassador, mali. Eh, paano kung sinabi niya, good morning?
(1:12:42) Paano kung sinabi niya, Nihao, good morning, kino-condemn natin yun? Bawal na mag good morning sa Pilipinas? You might say it’s obvious na hindi yun ang kino-condemn. There’s no such thing as obvious. The records of the Senate will bear this resolution and the discussions in this August Hall. But anyone can add and subtract if it’s general.
(1:13:06) So which statements are we talking about so that we in the minority, in the opposition, can be able to debate? That’s why I started out today by simply saying, pagdating sa South China Sea, sa West Philippine Sea, nagkakaisa tayo, magkakasama tayo. Atin ito, ipaglaban natin ito. Pero pagdating sa bastusan, out kami dyan. Kasi yung tama is tama, mali is mali. So ang question po ngayon…
(1:13:35) What will we do, gentlemen from the esteemed senator, gentlemen from Pampanga and the author? Will you supply us or will we annex or add whereas-es so that we will see ano ba tong statements na to?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:13:51) Mr. President, I think the whereas-es are clear. And just a little bit of research on the part of the researchers will confirm what we are referring to. We don’t need to annex all of them, Mr. President.
(1:14:05) For example, in response to the public statements of the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China that opposed and criticized these positions and questioned the propriety of Philippine officials expressing such views in the performance. So it specified the nature of the statements. So a little bit of research. Malalaman mo na which statements were these?
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:14:28) Point of order, Mr. President. Point of order.
SENATOR PING LACSON:
(1:14:31) What is your point of order?
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:14:32) The statements of Senator Pangilinan. The nature of his statements. Kayo na mag-research kung ano statements na yun, Mr. President. Sabi niya, pwede daw yun eh.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:14:41) Mr. President, I’m not yet done.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO::
(1:14:44) No, that’s why I gave a point of order. Mr. President, that’s why I gave a point of order.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:14:47) May I just be, I am still speaking, Mr. President.
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:14:51) It’s a point of order, Mr. President. A point of order precedes your precedence.
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:14:55) Mr. President…
SENATOR MIGZ ZUBIRI:
(1:14:57) Mr. President, may we ask the minority floor leader to state the point of order, which part of the rules was…
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:15:03) Mr. President…
SENATOR MIGZ ZUBIRI:
(1:15:04) Which part of the rules was…
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:15:05) Wala. I’m making a point, Mr. President, that you cannot make a motion and then say, i-research mo na lang yung laman. Sabi kasi niya, pwede mo daw ipasa to, tapos nandiyan naman yung nature. Ano nga ang statement? So, in the same manner, Mr. President, I admit…
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:15:22) Where is the point of order?
SENATOR ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(1:15:22) May I finish?
SENATOR KIKO PANGILINAN:
(1:15:22) Where is the point of order, Mr. President?
SENATOR PING LACSON:
(1:15:37) Session is suspended.
