New Zealand and the Philippines have signed a new maritime security agreement and stated their concerns over activity in the South China Sea, as Chinese vessels continue to flout international law.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Philippines President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos committed to signing a Mutual Logistics Supporting Arrangement by the end of 2024, and to concluding a Status of Visiting Forces Agreement.

These new frameworks would increase the interoperability of the New Zealand and Philippines militaries, allowing them to carry out more multilateral maritime operations, port visits, and training exercises.

“Together, we are committed to stepping up the defence relationship, with president Marcos and I directing our officials to get the legal underpinnings in place for our military to work alongside one another in a more frictionless manner,” Luxon said.

While neither leader explicitly named China, when they said they shared “serious concerns” about recent actions in the South China Sea the target of those comments was clear.

During Luxon’s visit to the Malacañang Palace in Manila, both countries repeatedly stated the importance of international law, freedom of navigation, and the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea.

With anywhere from 60 to 80 percent of New Zealand’s trade transiting through Southeast Asia, there were both economic and security reasons to keep tensions from flaring any further.

This commitment to bolstering defence ties came a day after Luxon described the world as “more disrupted and more fragile than we’ve seen in a generation” – and as New Zealand takes a more forward-leaning position on China’s aggressions in the South China Sea.

Ahead of his meeting with Marcos on Thursday, Luxon said New Zealand did not take positions on individual claims, but would continue to call out countries where their actions broke international laws. 

“We are concerned about the dangerous behaviour we’ve seen with ships in the South China Sea in particular, and obviously we want to see de-escalation and tensions resolved diplomatically,” he said.

But last month, the New Zealand embassy in Manila ramped up the rhetoric when it put out two statements saying it was “deeply concerned” at “dangerous actions” taken by Chinese vessels towards the Philippines at Second Thomas Shoal.

The embassy detailed China’s use of water cannons and contact by vessels, which it said “threaten lives at sea”.

Luxon rolled out the well-rehearsed lines provided by foreign officials during the Singapore and Thailand legs of the trip, but the situation in the Philippines was different.

Manila’s assertive stance against China, and its increasing security ties with the United States, now makes it an outlier among Asean nations.

Just two days after Luxon jets home following a week-long tour of Southeast Asia, the Philippines will begin its largest ever joint training exercise with the US in the South China Sea. It comes as the Philippines has revitalised its treaty alliance with Washington, D.C. 

New Zealand is one of 14 observer nations at the 16,000-strong Balikatan exercise. With the new defence arrangements, the NZDF would likely be able to join this exercise in the future.

China’s foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said the Philippines’ joining with the US to play war games would “only lead to greater insecurity for itself”.

Meanwhile, president Marcos has openly supported Aukus – again, going a step further than its Asean counterparts.

This comes as the Labour Party convened a panel of anti-Aukus foreign policy experts back home on Thursday.

Former Prime Minister Helen Clark, former Australian foreign minister Bob Carr, former Tuvalu prime minister Enele Sopoaga, and University of Otago professor Robert Patman all criticised the Government’s policy to “explore” joining Aukus Pillar Two, saying it was a shift away from New Zealand’s independent foreign policy.

Patman said the notable shift by this Government came in linking Aukus to closer relations with the US. Carr was more frank, calling Pillar Two “bullshit”, while Labour’s Parker said the public should be consulted before the Government made any decisions.

Meanwhile, Beijing said Aukus could spur a new arms race and lead to increased regional tensions.

Luxon would not commit to consulting the public before making a decision on Aukus but defended his Government’s position, saying it was consistent with that of the former administration.

Luxon met with Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos and his wife Liza Marcos for the second time. The first time was in Melbourne last month. Photo: Dan Brunskill/interest.co.nz

Luxon’s statements on freedom of navigation and maritime law will be welcomed by the Philippines.

This was the first time a New Zealand leader had visited the country in 18 years (Helen Clark was the last to make a bilateral trip, in 2006). The fact that New Zealand is reasserting its position on the South China Sea while in the country could help to build further trust and cooperation between the two.

Luxon said the two countries had a lot in common. “We stand up for international rules-based systems; we believe in freedom of navigation; we’re outward-looking trading nations that want to do well for our people in the world,” he said.

It was a point reiterated by Marcos, who himself said: “As mature democracies and responsible states, both our countries hold similar values, including our respect for international law. Such as: the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and respecting and upholding the rule of law is a matter of concern – not only for the Philippines in New Zealand – but absolutely, certainly the rest of the international community as well.”

Thursday’s defence agreements and statements, as well as NZDF’s observer role in the Balikatan exercise, would no doubt be noted by China.

The meeting in Manila rounds out Luxon’s bilateral meetings, during his week-long trip to Southeast Asia. Photo: Dan Brunskill/interest.co.nz

Luxon’s performance in Manila further revealed his Government’s foreign policy style.

During his trip to the United Nations, Foreign Minister Winston Peters delivered a strong speech on Gaza, in a ‘serendipitous’ 3.15pm timeslot after Russia, China, and the Palestinian representative.

Although he didn’t mention the US by name, it was obvious he was calling it out over its use of the veto to cause a resolution on a ceasefire in Gaza to fail.

Luxon replicated this approach in his first trip to the Philippines, as he looked to “re-energise” the relationship between the two new leaders.

Diplomatic relations between the countries began in 1966, and the Filipino diaspora in New Zealand had grown to 100,000 people. However, relations had stalled in recent years, under the rule of Rodrigo Duterte, given his poor human rights record.

Under Marcos – the son of former Philippines dictator Ferdinand Marcos Sr – the Philippines and New Zealand had shared values, and was more externally focussed, Luxon said.

The Prime Minister was joined by Philippines-born MP Paulo Garcia on his trip. Garcia sat to Luxon’s immediate left during his bilateral meeting with Marcos, while New Zealand’s ambassador to the Philippines Peter Kell took up the seat to his right.

The Prime Minister stayed at the president’s mansion on Thursday night, before rounding off his Southeast Asia trip with a final day in Manila.

Join the Conversation

3 Comments

  1. China has somewhat more of a presence than before, but what about the provocative 400 odd military bases of the USA in the Pacific? Our knee jerk relationship there has gotten us into more trouble than help in the past. The future will not be in ramping up exploitative military fantasies.

    1. Oh more trouble than help? You honestly think that? So the horrendous island by island campaign by the US to root out the fanatical Japanese invaders across the Pacific, which secured the peace and security of our countries just eighty years ago – was more trouble than help? Without the US we were, and remain, defenceless.

  2. Diplomacy seems to be art of being hypocritical.

    Talking up the rule of international law while cozying up to the ‘international law is whatever we decide it is in our interests’ United States of America, for example.

Leave a comment