A patriotic response to Anna Malindog-Uy's 'Was recent skirmish at Scarborough Shoal a calculated diversionary tactic?'

IN the Aug. 11, 2024, issue of The Manila Times (TMT) headlined "Chinese jets harass PH patrol aircraft," appears a map showing the disputed claims in the South China Sea. It clearly shows, even to those with reading problems like myself, that Scarborough Shoal is approximately four times nearer to the Philippines than to China. It is, therefore, unpatriotic, to say the least, for anyone, especially those with access to publications, to publish even crazy ideas that only embolden and or incense China to continue occupying illegally some parts of our sovereignty instead of softening their stance in order to make a stride in the continuous dialogues between the two contesting parties as earlier agreed upon to settle their dispute. These, of course, are to the detriment of the pronouncements of President Bongbong Marcos that he, as the president, won't allow even a square centimeter of Philippine territory to be lost even as we seek a diplomatic course in the settlement of the claims issue with China.

Reference is therefore made to Anna Malindog-Uy's column in the August 17 issue of TMT entitled "Was recent skirmish at Scarborough Shoal a calculated diversionary tactic?" As an avid reader of The Manila Times, my answer is a big "No." The routine patrol of the Philippine Air Force plane over the Scarborough Shoal is an execution of the bounden duty of the President of the Republic of the Philippines through the chain of command to undertake proactive protective measures that ascertain the peace and security of his country and countrymen. To infer that President Marcos is trying to invite or bait trouble from China by ordering the flight despite knowledge that it is occupied by China, which has claimed de facto sovereignty over Scarborough Shoal since 2012, is injecting local politics into a serious regional problem under negotiation hence insulting and a product of a malicious, biased and misguided mind, equating duty to irresponsibility.