Dassault Rafale Fighter Jet for the Philippine Air Force?

The Philippine Air Force's multi-role fighter jet acquisition program recently has undertaken multiple tweaks and updates, whereby it enabled other aerospace companies to join the fray into securing the contract that now calls for at least forty (40) units of such fighter aircraft for this service branch's air defense requirements. 

With more competition now on its way, so does the detail discussion of the new entrant that provides additional gauging against the already established ones in this project, particularly in the capabilities point of view and other areas of consideration.

AS REPORTED IN A FRENCH OUTLET

A Dassault Rafale F4 of the Greek Air Force, seen taxiing. The French aerospace company now expresses interest to take part in the Philippine Air Force's Multi-role Fighter Jet Acquisition Project.
(c) Alessandro Magia, Jet Photos.

An air force aspires to enforce its mandate by having a robust air defense system that effectively provides additional protection of the airspace or an Air Defense Identification Zone or ADIZ over the country's sovereign domain. 

This usually comes with a layered air defense solution, ranging from air surveillance radars to ground based air defense systems or GBADs, and also includes the very essential component of the service branch's operations, dwelling to the capabilities of its fighter aircraft in service.

The Philippine Air Force aspires just as that, aspiring, planning, and pushing into the purchase of its own multi-role fighter jet aircraft, of which upon entering active service will come as a crucial platform needed in intercepting, escorting, and shutting down intruding aircraft, while doubles as a close air support platform that can destroy targets, both at land and at sea. And with this aim already came with its own set of discussions, particularly to the first two platforms before the entry of this new aircraft candidate.

Through the years since the Revised AFP Modernization Program Law or the Republic Act 10349, the Philippine Air Force has initially pushed for at least twelve (12) aircraft, with aerospace companies such as Lockheed Martin from the United States and SAAB from Sweden competing against each other, presenting their offers as the F-16 Block 70/72 Viper and the JAS-39 Gripen C/D, respectively. The latter has since then upgraded its offer into the JAS-39 Gripen E/F variant.

Then the news came regarding the Department of National Defense's request for the multi-role fighter jet acquisition project of the Philippine Air Force where, aside from being in the priority list, has now increased the number of units from the initial twelve (12) or a squadron of aircraft to forty (40) units or equivalent to three (3) squadrons plus four (4) multirole fighter jets.  This has caught the attention of other aerospace companies that have now pitching their respective offers to the project.

Here comes a French news outlet Avions Legendaires, reporting Dassault Aviation's interest in marketing its Rafale F4 multirole fighter aircraft to the Philippine Air Force's own MRF acquisition program, along with others such as the Eurofighter Typhoon EF-2000 tranche 4 aircraft. 

This is an interesting tidbit, especially that Korea Aerospace Industries or KAI have also pitched in for this project as they market their recently developed KF-21 Boramae fighter aircraft into the program.

The entry of additional competitors basically makes the Philippine Air Force multi-role fighter jet acquisition program being more competitive than ever, although deep information gathered from previous years up to present still has the preference to both the F-16 Block 70/72 Viper and JAS-39 Gripen E/F variants. Still, the entry of the French military aerospace manufacturer itself is a welcoming development, worthy of a discussion of its own, which will be the primary topic of this entry.

While the French outlet covers both the Rafale F4 and the Eurofighter Typhoon EF-2000 Tranche 4 multirole fighter jets, this discussion will deal with the first aforementioned aircraft, of which the usual details will delve into, with the manner that is typically covered here in Pitz Defense Analysis. 

The information will cover the history of the French aerospace manufacturer, development of the aircraft design, specification of the fighter jet, operators of the aircraft, and comparison among candidates.

KNOWING DASSAULT AVIATION

Dassault Aviation's three key products - the Dassault Falcon civilian aircraft, the Rafale F4, and the nEUROn unmanned aerial systems drone.
From Dassault website.

Primarily, the discussions that cover the ongoing developments in the Philippine Air Force’s Multi-role Fighter Jet Acquisition Project only delves with aerospace manufacturers that are familiar among Filipino defense enthusiasts that monitor this development for quite some time now. 

Usually, it is between the United States-based military industrial complex named Lockheed Martin and Sweden’s SAAB, with the likes of Korea Aerospace Industries or KAI now included in the mix.

And here comes this French aerospace manufacturer, which is basically a new entrant into this expanded acquisition project that the Philippine Air Force now pushes, promoting a fighter aircraft that is more capable, yet being more expensive compared to its other European contemporaries such as the Eurofighter Typhoon. 

Entering the scene is Dassault Aviation, the French aerospace manufacturer that produces not only the Rafale F4 currently offered to the Philippines but also the old ones like the Mirage fighters.

The French aerospace company’s history traces back in 1916, when an aeronautics engineer named Marcel Bloch first developed a new series of aircraft for the French military, which found itself embroiled in a conflict against the Axis Powers of both Germany and the Austro-Hungarian empire in the First World War. His name became a legend in French aeronautical history when he designed and developed the first French-made aircraft propeller named “Eclair”.

Although the French aviation industry traces back to the First World War, it was at the end of the Second World War that the reorganization that sees semblance to the modern-day Dassault Aviation took place. This started when the Marcel Bloch company reorganized into the Marcel Dassault company in 1947, whereby it was through this period that the French aerospace company started producing the iconic Mirage family of fighter aircraft that was the mainstay combatant of the French Air Force.

It was also from this period that the Dassault company started developing the Mystère 20, commonly known as the Dassault Falcon 20 civilian aircraft that is still in operation by several users across the globe, such as the Belgian Air Force and the French Air Force.

This type of aircraft helped the French aerospace company to expand its business to the civilian market, improving their financial prospects aside from relying fully on the military market and the orders provided by various governments for its fighter jets.

Currently, Dassault Aviation’s business model encompasses beyond producing military aircraft such as the Rafale F4 that it currently offers to the Philippine Air Force, but also in the market of selling civilian aircraft such as the Dassault Falcon family of private jet aircraft, and also developing spacecraft concepts such as the IXV (Intermediate eXperimental Vehicle) and the VEHRA (VéHicule Hypersonique RéUtilisable AéRoporté) Family that firms such as the European Space Industry or ESA may consider.

Now, with Dassault Aviation's long history of developing fighter aircraft for France, its home country, and the successful export such as the Dassault Mirage family of aircraft to other countries such as India and Taiwan, their offer of Rafale F4 for the Philippine Air Force is a capable platform that came from the fruits of aerospace design and production experience, and the next portion of this topic will now delve into the development history of the aircraft.

AIRCRAFT DEVELOPMENT

The Dassault Rafale F4 is France's recently developed fighter aircraft.
Image Source.

The success of Dassault Rafale F4 in its design and usage will get delve deeper, particularly on the history of its development and deployment, along with the attributes that enabled this French-made fighter aircraft to be one the most capable combat aircraft available aside from other European and US-made fighter aircraft that countries like India and Indonesia being sought after. This comes as its capabilities have presented as one advantage for its bid for the Philippine Air Force’s Multirole Fighter Jet Acquisition.

Speaking of the Dassault Rafale F4, it simply count as the recent and the latest iteration of the fighter jet that belongs Dassault Rafale family tracing back to the F1 variant, as this standard started full development in 2019 when the French Armed Forces has signed a 2 Billion Euro contract with Dassault Aviation. Multiple upgrades incorporated with this recent variant of the Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft, with its details discussed in the latter part of this article.

Development of the Dassault Rafale traces back to the Cold War era, one of which shares history with the European fighter aircraft contemporary, the Eurofighter Typhoon fighter jet operated by countries like Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain. 

The highlighted change from this part of historical development is that France left the consortium that jointly developed the European fighter aircraft concept, resulting in the latter having its own type of fighter sharing design cues with the consortium.

The development history that made the Dassault Rafale the capable French-made fighter aircraft it is today goes back in the 1970s, when the French Air Force and the French Navy (as being the other country that has a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, which is the Charles de Gaulle), both need a multirole fighter jet capable of taking complex and handling stresses of French mission requirements, especially from carrier landing and takeoff operations.

To take note, Dassault Aviation already has an impressive experience in developing and producing fighter aircraft during that period, especially with the success and exemplary performance brought by the Dassault Mirage 2000 multirole fighter aircraft that countries such as the United Arab Emirates, India, Peru, Taiwan, Greece, and Egypt all opt in into having its fighter in their respective air force. Such fighters, in unspecified numbers, are now on their way to Ukraine for war support at the time of this writing.

While the Dassault Rafale multirole fighter aircraft successfully took its maiden flight in 1986, it took the French more than a decade until it entered active service within the French Armed Forces, first within the French Navy in 2004, and eventually in the French Air Force in 2006. 

Since then, it became the mainstay fighter combat aircraft of the French Armed Forces, and is now garnering successful sales orders from countries such as India, Indonesia, and Greece.

Speaking of successful sales orders, the next portion of this topic will cover how the aforementioned countries have put the Dassault Rafale into consideration, in which these countries ended up getting the French-made aircraft, basically adding up to the number of prospective users of the Rafale to-date. 

Adding also to this portion is regarding the process and deliveries taken by the said countries for this fighter aircraft, providing enhanced air defense system capabilities for their respective national airspace.

CURRENT USERS AND BOOKED ORDERS

India bought several Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft units from France for its air force requirements.
Image Source.

During the time this article gets published, there are countries that the French aerospace company is actively catering to, producing multiple units of the newest variant of the Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft and delivering the same platforms to the recipient air forces that book orders for their respective air defense capabilities. In the Indo-Pacific region alone, there are countries that are buying the aircraft by bulk, augmenting the platforms currently existing on their inventory squadrons of aircraft.

The countries discussed here refer to India and the neighboring Indonesia, both of which booked orders to Dassault for the production and delivery of the Rafale F4 for their respective air defense requirements. As for India’s case, it also aims to get the Dassault Rafale M fighter aircraft to satisfy the Indian Navy requirements, especially that it intends to get deployed into the Indian aircraft carrier, the INS Vikrant. Getting the Rafale for both the Indian Air Force and Navy makes it one of Dassault’s important customers.

For the neighboring country of Indonesia, the Indonesian Air Force (Tentara Nasional Indonesia - Angkatan Udara or TNI-AU) has successfully purchased at least forty-two (42) Rafale F4 multirole fighter aircraft for their air defense requirements, of which this sale replaced the supposed acquisition of additional Sukhoi Su-35 from Russia. Of course, the original deal did not push through, given the potential of seriously threatening sanctions imposed at the onset of the Russo-Ukrainian conflict.

This means that Indonesia will probably receive the first deliveries of the Dassault Rafale F4 multirole fighter aircraft into the country by 2026, further improving their air defense capabilities aside from already maintaining a fleet of F-16 fighter jets from the United States and a handful of Sukhoi Su-27s and Su-30s that have currently serving the Indonesian military service branch. The deliveries will render the country as Dassault’s first customer of the Rafale F4 fighter jet in Southeast Asia.

Outside the Indo-Pacific region, the European country of Greece also sees the potential capability of the Dassault Rafale F4 fighter aircraft that their air force has plans to purchase at least ten (10) more French-made fighter aircraft on its squadron, aimed to replace the other aging aircraft serving the Hellenic air service branch’s F4 Phantom, Mirage 2000, and several of its F-16 fighter aircraft. This is on top of the six (6) brand new units of the Rafale F4 fighter purchased by the Mediterranean country.

Other countries like Egypt also purchased and currently operate the Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft, although the version that their air force maintains is both the single-seat Rafale-EM multirole fighter aircraft and its double-seater version, which is the Dassault Rafale DM variant. This makes Egypt the current and only African country that operates and maintains the French-made fighter aircraft, giving needed air defense capabilities for its own requirements.

Overall, there are several countries other than France that aim to purchase, operate, and maintain the Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft, which improves the sale prospects and market reach of the French aerospace manufacturer in the global military and aerospace marketplace. 

Its participation in the Philippine Air Force’s multirole fighter jet acquisition project comes as part of that strategy that will enable Dassault Aviation to further cement its market share in the Indo-Pacific region other than India and Indonesia.

SPECIFICATIONS

This is the French-made fighter aircraft's specifications overview. Capabilities vary per variant.
Image Source.

In this part of the discussion, the details will delve primarily on the capabilities that a Dassault Rafale multirole fighter aircraft possess, especially upon determining its detailed specifications on its size dimensions, weapons load-out, and the performance that this aircraft possess that will define its chances of success in a combat. Take note that the specifications of a multirole fighter jet can vary on different variants of the Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft produced since its development and introduction.

The specification presented above encompasses the Dassault Rafale C fighter aircraft variant, of which this refers to the land-based, single seater version of the French aerospace fighter aircraft product. 

This variant is the one that is more commonly operated by different countries’ air forces like the ones aforementioned, with the Rafale M variant having an aircraft carrier oriented capabilities and designs suitable for operations involving short takeoffs and landings, plus the conditions at sea.

Not mentioned in the infographic provided above are the basic dimensions of the Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft, whereby basing from the official information provided by the Dassault Aviation on their website, comes with a wingspan of 10.90 meters, length of the aircraft from the nose tip to the tail at around 15.30 meters, and the aircraft’s height up to the tip of its tail fin at around 5.30 meters. The fuselage, including the engines fitted onboard, gives an overall empty weight of the aircraft at around ten (10) tons.

Going further into its weight, of which aside from the aforementioned overall empty weight, the Dassault Rafale has a maximum take-off weight or MTOW at 24.5 tons or 54,000lbs, of which it means it can fit with at least 14.5 tons of both munitions and fuel stored onboard its fuel tanks, itself has a fuel capacity at around 4.7 tons (10,300lbs) internal or within the aircraft, and around 6.7 tons (14,700lbs) on its external fuel tanks for expanded range. This leaves an external load for munitions at around 9.5 tons.

Another factor to check aside from the aircraft’s size and weight is its performance, specifically by the power output provided by its engines. Being a dual-engine multirole fighter aircraft, the Dassault Rafale has the maximum thrust of 2x 7.5 tons, limit load factors that range from -3.2G to +9G, maximum speed of Mach 1.8 or 750 knots, approach speed of less than 120 knots, landing ground run of 450 meters or 1,500 feet without drag-chute deployment, and a maximum service ceiling of 50,000 feet.

Speaking of its engines, the Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft currently comes with the M88 new generation turbofan engine, specifically the latest version of this engine that likely comes with the Rafale F4 fighter aircraft, which is the M88-4E version. 

Having rated at the force of 10,971 lbs dry and 16,620lbs with afterburner, the M88 turbofan engine provides the needed performance boost that the Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft comes with that its prospective customers sought after for their air defense use.

As its dimensions and capabilities as presented in its fullest, the next part of this discussion will delve primarily on providing a detailed comparison of the French-made aircraft to other candidates that are currently taking part in the Philippine Air Force's Multirole Fighter Jet Acquisition Project, especially against the candidates that have currently the edge or previously preferred by decision makers through its paces, such as the F-16 Viper, JAS-39 Gripen E variant, and the KF-21 Boramae.

COMPARISON

A comprehensive comparison of the Dassault Rafale compared to the two primary candidates for the MRF project of the Philippine Air Force.
Image Reference for the two other aircraft here.

Given the specifications provided for the Dassault Rafale F4’s capabilities, there really is a clear indicator that the French-made fighter aircraft comes at a capability that is far better than the current contemporaries that is taking part in the Philippine Air Force’s Multirole Fighter Jet Acquisition Project. 

At the time of publishing this article, the air service branch of the Armed Forces of the Philippines had the candidate’s list shortened to likely platforms - the JAS-39 Gripen E/F variant, F-16 Block 70/72 Viper, and the KF-21 Boramae.

Apparently, the better comparison for the showcased capabilities of the Dassault Rafale multirole fighter aircraft is between it and the advanced fighter aircraft that Lockheed Martin currently markets on advanced economies of like-minded countries on the planet, which is the F-35 Lightning II stealth multirole fighter jet. 

Capability-wise, the French-made fighter aircraft presented advantages in its speed and maneuverability, while the F-35 is at an advantage with its reduced radar cross section or RCS.

Provided in a comparison chart provided above, the Dassault Rafale has at least fourteen (14) hard points, of which five (5) are utilizable for external fuel tanks for an expanded range of the aircraft. 

This made the Dassault Rafale more capable in its carrying capacity as compared to the other contemporaries that are candidates of the Philippine Air Force’s Multirole Fighter Jet Acquisition Project, namely Lockheed Martin’s F-16 Block 70/72 Viper, and the SAAB JAS-39 Gripen E/F variant.

There are subcomponents that are compatible with the current and prospect wares that the Armed Forces of the Philippines at large will get eventually, and there are others that are likely adding logistical chains with what the organization has presently. One highlighted compatibility is with the MBDA MICA air-to-air missiles that came with the Dassault Rafale multirole fighter jet, as the Philippine Navy is likely getting the naval variant for the upcoming Miguel Malvar-class frigates.

And there are the differences that might complicate logistics chain, as engines like the Twin Snecma M88-4E are not common with the Philippine Air Force, which uses US-made jet engines on the FA-50s, and are also coming with its competitors such as the SAAB JAS-39 Gripen E/F variant and the Lockheed Martin F-16 Block 70/72 Viper. This is aside from the fact that the Dassault Rafale usually comes with the R.550 Magic II air-to-air missile, and not the US-made contemporaries such as the AIM-9 Sidewinder.

Given the information provided on the table above, of which the details originated from both the Dassault Aviation website and the information provided by the Hellenic Air Force, the Rafale that the French Aviations company is offering to the Philippine Air Force, while capable compared to its competitors in terms of engine thrust and hard points, does not have the logistical advantages. 

This is really clear, especially that the Philippine military conducts joint exercises with the United States military, with munitions commonality being a plus.

The data presented come as an important parameter for the Philippine Air Force to consider in choosing their preferable multirole fighter aircraft that serve as the frontline platform in defending the Philippine Air Defense Identification Zone or PADIZ, in tandem with the air surveillance radars that the service branch such as the J/FPS-3ME from Mitsubishi Electric, and ground-based air defense systems such as the Rafael Spyder GBADS, of which the third battery has delivered recently.

TO SURMISE IT UP

Two (2) Dassault Rafale fighters flying on the sunrise.
Image Source.

The Philippine Air Force is now getting closer to the finalization of the Multirole Fighter Jet Acquisition Project, of which the push into getting the desirable number of at least forty (40) fighter aircraft has now received attention from other aerospace companies, of which it is now pitching their respective offers, hoping that the Philippine Air Force considers their offer and eventually getting that portion of the Southeast Asian defense and aerospace market.

This development now encourages European aerospace companies like Dassault Aviation and the Eurofighter consortium to provide their respective offers that the Philippine Air Force might consider. 

It comes on top of what has already offered previously by prospective aerospace companies that have taken part on the Multirole Fighter Jet Acquisition Project from the beginning, such as Lockheed Martin’s F-16 Block 70/72 Viper, and the SAAB JAS-39 Gripen, upgraded from the C/D variant to the latest E/F variant.

As it comes usually, the French aerospace company has presented its Rafale F4 multirole fighter jet to the Philippine Air Force to consider, of which it is currently operational with various air forces across the globe, of which on that list includes the country of India and Indonesia, which is the country’s immediate neighbor in Southeast Asia. Theoretically, a win in the Philippine aerospace defense market will cement Dassault Aviation’s foothold in the region for supplying aerospace defense equipment.

The Dassault Rafale presented its capability as it has fourteen (14) hard points, showcasing its significant carrying capacity for getting external fuel tanks and/or guided and unguided munitions onboard, adding the desirable range and firepower output depending on mission requirements and the usage of the French multirole fighter to satisfy the objectives presented at hand. True to the French defense industry, its munitions ecosystem goes limited into the likes of both the MBDA MICA and Meteor for air-to-air missiles, as well as the Exocet for its anti-ship munitions, all of which being French-developed munitions.

This limit serve as an obstacle for the French multirole fighter from the logistical standpoint, as the Philippine Air Force inventory primarily composed of AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, along with munitions that might come up for the primary candidates, referring to the Lockheed Martin F-16 Block 70/72, SAAB JAS-39 Gripen E/F variant, and the newest entrant to in this development, the KF-21 Boramae from Korea Aerospace Industries or KAI.

With the Multirole Fighter Jet Acquisition Project of the Philippine Air Force being the utmost priority of the service branch at the implementations standpoint, the decision making comes closer to define the winning supplier for this acquisition program, whereby it will define the organization’s air defense aircraft composition in the upcoming years. This comes as the Department of National Defense now puts full time and resources into improving the territorial defense capabilities of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

Ultimately, each of the fighter jets presented for the Philippine Air Force’s largest and most ambitious acquisition project in the history of the Revised AFP Modernization Program has their respective advantages and disadvantages, all of which requires in-depth assessment that is in line with actual requirements of the air service branch’s mission objectives. In the end, the capabilities presented helps the entire Philippine Armed Forces to weigh in and maximize the value of the government resources.

(c) 2024 PDA.

Share:

Read More

An Important Clarification on the Philippines' New Maritime Laws

The Philippine government has recently enacted two (2) pieces of legislation, of which it encompasses the country's maritime domain and its provisions, and with the details of each enacted laws come as a separate discussion on this website upon its official release on key government channels.

However, several people in one social media outlet handled by our entity aired their misguided sentiments, of which most of these people originated from across Southeast Asia. This piece gives the aim to provide the additional context and important information relating to the functions of the laws, in relation to the stipulations of the international law, specifically the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea or UNCLOS.

THE ENACTMENT OF MARITIME LAWS

The new maritime laws aim to solidify Philippines' claims on its Exclusive Economic Zone, putting it within the scope according to the guidelines under international law.
(c) Spratly Islands - Kalayaan Tourism, via Image Source.

Last November 8, 2024, Philippine President Ferdinand R Marcos Jr has signed two (2) very important pieces of legislation relating to the country's maritime domain, namely the Republic Act (RA) 12064 or the Philippine Maritime Zones Act and RA 12065 or the Philippine Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act. Both of which give essential provisions that govern the enforcement and coverage of the Philippine maritime domain, and also providing the guidelines for sea lanes.

Specifically, the Republic Act 12064 or the Philippine Maritime Zones Act enforces the country's maritime domain in accordance to the standards set by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea or UNCLOS, comprehensively define the geographic coverage of the Philippine maritime domain and the legalistic mechanisms for the government to enforce the Philippine law on the areas encompassed within this said comprehensive coverage.

This said law also enforces of putting and recognizing the name "West Philippine Sea" into law, further binding the Philippine claims within its 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone for its western seaboard, specifically the areas encompassing the Kalayaan Island Group or KIG and the Panatag Shoal or Bajo de Masinloc. With this emphasis on maritime jurisdiction, it aims to further ensure the rights of the Philippines as a maritime country, providing Filipinos with the right to enjoy its resources.

In the second law enacted on the same day, the Republic Act 12065 or the Philippine Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act, it emphasizes the definition of providing the country's territorial and exclusive economic zone waters that serve as 'maritime sea lanes' that foreign vessels can trespass within the country's jurisdiction, with provisions also apply on the country's air routes. There are at least three (3) sea lanes specified under this law, whereby vessels can pass to and from the West Philippine Sea through Celebes and (East) Philippine Seas.

Specifically, the sea lanes provided according to the Republic Act 12065 goes as follows - the first one traverses from the (East) Philippine Sea to the West Philippine Sea through the Balintang Channel between the Batanes and Babuyan Islands. The second one traverses from the Celebes Sea to the West Philippine Sea through the Sibutu Passage, Sulu Sea, Cuyo East Pass, and Mindoro Strait. Finally, the third one traverses once again from the Celebes Sea to the West Philippines Sea, this time via Basilan Strait, Nasubata Channel in Palawan's southern tip, Sulu Sea, and Balabac Channel.

The two (2) piece of legislation aims to provide clarity to the extent of the Philippine jurisdiction, while being affirmative to its maritime domain in accordance to the international law, specifically the ones provided by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea or UNCLOS as the basis that enables this as a way that it has the full backing and compatibility to the policy and principles set by international legal bodies. As with other laws, it will come with its own Implementing Rules and Regulations that might take time to draft at the time of this writing.

As this development regarding the enactment of Philippine maritime domain laws takes time to get published on official government channels from the time this article publishes, the following detailed information aims to provide a primary approach in understanding the international laws and the mapping of the country's maritime domain, as it comes at attention lately that several Southeast Asian people are misleadingly outrageous on the reference map posted on one of our social media channels.

THE 2009 ARCHIPELAGIC BASELINES MAP

The 2009 Archipelagic Baselines Law map, as set by Republic Act 9522. NAMRIA will publish a new version under the new legislation.

On this November 8 post entry we made through X (formerly Twitter), it benignly captions the enactment of the Republic Act (RA) 12064 or the Philippine Maritime Zones Act and RA 12065 or the Philippine Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act into law by the Philippine President. Initially, this post meant to provide the necessary updated information that will probably dictate the country's policy on its national maritime domain, specifically the West Philippine Sea area, in the upcoming years. 

Unexpectedly, a horde of Malaysian and Indonesian social media users on the Elon Musk owned social media website attacked the post and misinterpret this post as 'encroachment', saying harsh words that the Philippines is following the footsteps either of the Chinese or the Israelis in "claiming" Northern parts of Indonesia and portions of Malaysia, even though that this is not the case, nor the intent made when publishing the map.

The emphasis points to the green line drawn in the map, saying that it is the Philippine 'claims' over Sabah, the northern part of Indonesia, and most of Taiwan, when in fact this only provides the theoretical line for the country's Exclusive Economic Zone or EEZ if calculating the distance of 200 nautical miles from the nearest territorial baseline of the country. Apparently, the legends of the map also presented the median line (in purple) in both northern and southern parts of the country.

To clarify this up, and for the information of any Indonesian, Malaysian, our Filipino community readers in this medium, the map provides sufficient information on the jurisdiction and definition of the Philippine maritime domain during the time the map has crafted by National Mapping and Resource Information Authority or NAMRIA in 2009-2010, with the emphasis that the green line does not define Philippine territory, and more of its Exclusive Economic Zone (West Philippine Sea included), minus the overlapping domains with Taiwan on its north, and both Malaysia and Indonesia on its South. 

In fact, the Philippines' primary mapping agency will publish the new map of the Philippines' maritime domain that fully emphasizes the West Philippine Sea area, pending the completion and official publishing of the Maritime Domain Law's Implementing Rules and Regulations or IRR that serves as the RA 12064 or the Philippine Maritime Zone Act's primary guidelines for the agencies to adhere and follow, complementing the provisions presented by the law itself.

Hence, for any Indonesian or Malaysian citizen who went outraged from the post and is now reading this article, there really isn't need much of a worry as the Philippines does not intend to so-called 'claim' the areas within the 'green line' aside from the 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone for its western and eastern seaboards, as it only serves as mapping reference that calculates the extent of the EEZ to the baseline. It might be better to understand the context of the maps first before reacting.

Now as the outrageous and senseless calls by misinformed citizens of neighboring Southeast Asian countries setting aside for the sake of this discussion, let there be some additional context on the country's archipelagic baselines, of which it will briefly delve on particularly on the discussion encompassing the Republic Act 9522 that is the basis of the map provided above, and some key notes provided in the UNCLOS and the 2016 Arbitral Tribunal that nullifies China's claim.

REPUBLIC ACT 9522, UNCLOS, AND THE 2016 AWARD

The 2016 Arbitral Tribunal decision for the West Philippine Sea served as one of multiple bases for the recent enactment of the Philippine maritime laws.
Image Source.

When the map provided by the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority or NAMRIA in 2009-2010, the Philippines did not experience any intensified aggressiveness from China's Coast Guard, Maritime Militia, and the People's Liberation Army Navy in asserting its so-called 'claims' in the West Philippine Sea, which have prompted the government of that time to submit its documentary references that support Philippines' right over Kalayaan Island Group and Panatag Shoal.

On July 12, 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) at the Hague, the Netherlands, ultimately made a decision that nullifies China's nine-dash line in the West Philippine Sea and the greater South China Sea area, on the reference that it went beyond their supposedly Exclusive Economic Zone and that China's claims on historical grounds does not count as a reference under the 1983 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which they also ratified.

Added to this is the recent application of the Philippines over its extended continental shelf in the West Philippine Sea area before the United Nations, aiming to further cement the Philippines' undisputed jurisdiction over the areas like the Kalayaan Island Group, as it aims for the Philippines to have added legal basis for exploration and tapping on its maritime resources that the country will benefit economically. Of course, this does not stop countries like Vietnam from submitting their own version.

And, of course, the enactment of both the Republic Act (RA) 12064 or the Philippine Maritime Zones Act and RA 12065 or the Philippine Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act provides an additional reference for the government to get additional legal basis, grounded under international law, in asserting its rights over its Exclusive Economic Zone, particularly in the highly contested body of water named the West Philippine Sea where China illegally set up its artificial islands as power flexing.

Take note that all the emphasis on the enactment of the legalities and documentation are aiming against China's illegal claims in the West Philippine Sea area, of which this dismisses the erroneous perception on the previous map that, apparently, the Philippines also stake its claim in areas already part of Malaysia and Indonesia. In fact, this narrative only divides ASEAN unity even further that the only winner from this mess will be no other than - China.

Setting aside the overlapping areas that the Philippines will never likely to claim in this case, it is a clear resolve coming from the government to enact its laws that align more with the international law, as countries like the United States supports this move of the Philippine government, providing the needed mechanism for the agencies like the Philippine Coast Guard to enforce the Philippine laws in areas like the contested Kalayaan Island Group, being timely to its white hull acquisition spree.

As countries like the United States and Australia fully support the newly enacted maritime laws of the Philippines that cement further, not only it's legally grounded jurisdiction over the West Philippine Sea area like the Kalayaan Island Group and the Panatag Shoal, the next sub-topic of this discussion will cover the usual reaction of China on this law, along with some expected actions that attempts to counteract the well-recognized Philippine maritime laws.

CHINA AND MALAYSIAN GOVERNMENTS' REACTION ON THE MATTER

China’s so-called ‘claim’ in Panatag Shoal, Philippines.
Image Source.

As expected, the governments of both China and Malaysia will react to this newly enacted maritime domain laws of the Philippines, and will publicly denounce it as it runs contrary to its so-called ‘nine-dash line claims’ within the West Philippine Sea and the larger South China Sea area. In fact,the image provided above representing Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal with the imaginary baseline with Mandarin calligraphy written over it represents the larger neighbor’s attempt to respond to this situation.

The maritime law enactment resulted in China summoning the Philippine ambassador, conveying their full public protest as a show of full discontent by their government, as this goes preferable to the Philippines and the enacted laws' alignment to the standards set by the UNCLOS and the 2016 Arbitral Tribunal decision, which the Chinese opt not to adhere on. Going as usual are their historical arguments over the Kalayaan Island Group and the Panatag Shoal, both of which have no bearing under the UNCLOS.

Given China's disregard to the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration that nullifies the so-called 'nine-dash line claim' of the regional neighbor and superpower, the country instead push for its claims through aggression and violence, both of which affects the livelihood of Filipino fisherfolk that relies on the areas for a bountiful fishing, while endangering the lives of both the Philippine Navy and Philippine Coast Guard personnel that both have the legal right to patrol the country's Exclusive Economic Zone.

Despite the criticisms pointed by China to the Philippines over its new maritime laws, it is good to see that the government stands firm on its resolve to highlight and clearly marking of its maritime domain, while ensuring the preservation of the country's territorial integrity and sovereignty, along with its right under the international law to enjoy sovereign rights for its Exclusive Economic Zone, especially in tapping and exploiting maritime resources that will benefit its citizenry for economic development.

After China, it is now the Malaysian government's turn to criticize the Philippines' new maritime law, especially that they claim that it once again touches Sabah, which actually is not the intention of the Philippine government as the emphasis is once again pointed out to the country's resolve of territorial integrity over areas contested like the West Philippine Sea. Hence, like the reaction on the Chinese criticism, the Philippine government will not budge on this protest.

This come as this Southeast Asian neighbor also appeal before the United Nations body to disregard the Philippine submission on the establishment of the country's continental shelf information for the West Philippine Sea area, using Sabah as an argument once again, even though it primarily points to the Philippines' resolve to preserve its Exclusive Economic Zone, especially in areas encompassed by both Kalayaan Island Group and Panatag Shoal.

As ASEAN unity is unattainable given this circumstance, and even pointing that the aforementioned Southeast Asian government simply rides on the Chinese narrative that undermine the enacted Philippine maritime laws that align to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea or UNCLOS and the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration, it is at best interest for the Philippines to increase cooperation with its partnership with like-minded nations, and to improve its own defense posture.

ENDING NOTE

Clearer representation of the Philippine map.

The enactment of both the Republic Act (RA) 12064 or the Philippine Maritime Zones Act and RA 12065 or the Philippine Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act count as a significant development for the ensuring the country's territorial integrity and sovereignty, while safeguarding the citizenry's right to enjoy the maritime resources that are available in the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone waters, especially in terms of food security and the country's current energy demands.

This also aligns the country's domestic legislation and policy to the norms and standards stipulated and set by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea or UNCLOS and the 2016 Permanent Rule of Arbitration, both serve as reference to nullify and invalidate the Chinese 'nine-dash line' claims over the West Philippine Sea and the larger South China Sea area. It also gives preference on the enforcement capabilities to the agencies like the Philippine Coast Guard.

It goes as timely as the Philippine Coast Guard embarks on a huge acquisition program of acquiring additional white hull vessels, forty (40) of which are smaller, thirty (30) meter vessels, and this also include the acquisition of at least five (5) additional Teresa Magbanua-class Multirole Response Vessels, all of which will help cement the country's presence in the country's Exclusive Economic Zone in the West Philippine Sea area. Add to this are offers from various shipbuilders for this endeavour.

Of course, the newly enacted Philippine laws for its maritime domain will expectedly receive some criticisms, especially involving the powers that wanted full dominion in the West Philippine Sea with its claims that are not aligned with the international law, or by some Southeast Asian neighbor that is insecure about its territorial sovereignty, even though the Philippines have its current legislation not aimed against overlapping domains, but to cement its territorial integrity according to international law.

The map presented above gives e clearer definition of the scope and coverage of the Philippine maritime domain, especially the areas that it considers its Exclusive Economic Zone, such as its western and eastern seaboard. It encompasses both the Kalayaan Island Group and Panatag Shoal, both of which are clearly within the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone, and the Philippine (Benham) Rise in the east, of which this portion entitles to the Philippines' extended continental shelf.

As the Philippines affirms the passage of its maritime laws that has the backing of countries like the United States, this will only solidify the resolve of further solidifying its territorial integrity and national sovereignty even further, particularly when the Department of National Defense' Comprehensive Archipelagic Defense Concept or CADC comes into play. This also goes with the country's desire to push added cooperation with like-minded allies and partners with this concept.

To end this note, this writeup gives an important clarification on the overview of the new maritime laws that the Philippines is pushing, although there will go a follow-up discussion on this matter upon delving deeper into both the Republic Act 12064 and 12065 through a separate entry. 

It will be nonsense to think that the Philippine government provokes neighbors into conflict through this legislation, especially given that it does not want war, but it will not back down, and it has an absolute right to preserve and defend its national territory that is rightfully part of the country.

(c) 2024 PDA.

Share:

Read More