A man reflected in a radar image screen displaying a map

A radar screen aboard BRP Tarlac off the shore of Calayan Island, part of the Batanes group (Ezra Acayan/Getty Images)

Why Chinese claims of sovereignty over the Batanes cannot be ignored

As scholars argue, against fact, that the Batanes island group are a province of Taiwan, even seeding doubt could have a broader impact.

Vincent Kyle Parada

20 July 20264 min read

“The Batan Islands belong to Beijing” – or so a group of Chinese maritime scholars are reported to (Opens in new window) have claimed at an academic symposium in Guangzhou on June 30. This is a bizarre position to take, as the islands nested between the Philippines and Taiwan have been legally administered as an official province of the Philippines (known as Batanes, its northernmost province)since 1909. They are also home to a significant population of Filipino citizens.

Philippine Defence Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. was quick to denounce (Opens in new window) the claims as “ludicrous” and “baseless”. However, a closer look at the geopolitical backdrop against which they were made reveals a potentially more calculated manoeuvre on the part of the Chinese government.

The academic symposium followed an announcement on 28 May from Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi that they were launching formal negotiations to delimit (Opens in new window) their countries’ respective maritime boundaries. These boundaries are in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) but there are contested areas. The basis for Philippine claims in the area overlapping with Japan originates from its maritime entitlements over the Batanes Islands.

The scholars, including from Jinan University, Nanjing University and the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, among other institutions, are reported to have argued that the proposal by Japan and Philippines was a “grave violation” of international law and would infringe on China’s legitimate sovereignty over the Batanes Islands. They reportedly argued that since Taiwan lay between Japan and the Philippines, the two did not meet the legal requirements (Opens in new window) for bilateral maritime delimitation. They concluded that the Batanes Islands constituted “a natural geographic extension of Taiwan” administered under the Taiwan prefecture as far back as the Ming and Qing dynasties. Indeed, the Batanes Islands are close to Taiwan. Mavulis Island – Batanes’ northernmost point – is just 142 kilometres short of the Taiwanese mainland.

This dispute has wider implications for US–China relations – in particular in the event of a conflict over Taiwan.

It is not suggested that Beijing is interested in “re-integrating” the Batanes Islands as part of Chinese territory as it is with Taiwan. However, while China’s foreign ministry has yet to officially endorse the new claims, their supposed origin in scholarly debate and legal rumination – questionable as they are – provides Beijing with the pretext necessary to move against Tokyo and Manila, and more importantly, isolate Taiwan.

Since the announcement of the delimitation talks, China has intensified (Opens in new window) its maritime patrols in Taiwan’s eastern seaboard. There could be several reasons for this. The most obvious reason could be so China can undermine negotiations by maintaining a ‘spoiling presence’ that prevents co-claimants from fully asserting their jurisdiction over the disputed area. A second possibility is that they establish Beijing’s own claims through sovereignty operations that showcase its ability to administer and enforce Chinese maritime law. A third is that this normalises the presence of Chinese vessels east of Taiwan and the Philippines. This effectively bypasses the First Island Chain and has implications on United States-Philippines containment strategies.

Geographically speaking, the Batanes Islands are central to US–Philippines containment strategies. The allies have established bases to oversee the Luzon Strait, safeguarding access to and from the South China Sea and the broader Western Pacific through the Bashi Channel. Manila started fortifying the Batanes Islands (Opens in new window) in 2024. Bilateral and multilateral exercises with the US – including military exercise Balikatan 2026 (Opens in new window) – have since recalibrated toward a defence of the country’s northern border.

Philippine Defence Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. was quick to denounce the claims as “ludicrous” and “baseless” (UNDRR/Antoine Tardy)

This dispute has wider implications for US–China relations – in particular in the event of a conflict over Taiwan. Any US-led intervention regarding Taiwan must be predicated on the assumption that allied forces can successfully contain the People’s Liberation Army behind the First Island Chain. Even if Manila were to decide against kinetic operations, the Batanes Islands still serve as a vital humanitarian corridor for the free movement of supplies and people – including the around 200,000 Filipino workers based in Taiwan that would need to be repatriated in the event of armed conflict. If China is left to operate in the Western Pacific unabated, the First Island Chain no longer serves its purpose.

That is why claims made over the Batanes Islands cannot go unanswered. The Philippine government may think (Opens in new window) that the sovereignty of Batanes is “settled and not up for debate” and that “flights of fancy should not be dignified with a response” but these truths are not always self-evident. This is not the first time that China has misrepresented historical fact to suit its political purposes.

Manila would do well to remember that the “historic rights” that form the basis of Beijing’s expansive claims in the South China Sea can be traced as recently (Opens in new window) as the 20th century. They began the same way – in a room full of academics, huddled over maps, who judged themselves patriots and arbiters of the national truth. Yet, 10 years after the landmark legal victory for the Philippines against China’s claims on the South China Sea, the doubt laid by China continues to proliferate.

About the author

Vincent Kyle Parada

Vincent Kyle Parada is a Philippine-based defence analyst and lecturer at the De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde, where he teaches courses on national and international security.

Topics

South China Sea China Philippines Taiwan