CaliToday (23/11/2025): Tensions in the South China Sea (known in Vietnam as the East Sea) have escalated beyond disputed reefs and rocks. Chinese citizens are circulating highly provocative and unsupported claims online, asserting that the Philippine island of Palawan is, in fact, Chinese territory named ‘Zheng He Island.’ This new narrative which effectively turns Beijing’s controversial Nine-Dash Line into a Ten-Dash Line has been met with immediate and categorical rejection by Manila.
The posts, which gained traction on platforms like Weibo around February–March 2025, rely on a flimsy connection to the historical voyages of the Ming Dynasty admiral Zheng He (1405–1433). This is a significant shift, taking the territorial dispute from historical fishing grounds to the core sovereign territory of the Philippines.
Manila’s Categorical Rejection: Debunking the Claims
The Philippine government has strongly refuted these social media claims, labeling them as "absurd and historical fabrication." Manila provided a robust, multi-faceted rebuttal based on history, law, and geography:
1. Historical Fact Check: Zheng He's Reach
Indian Ocean Focus: Philippine historians assert that Zheng He’s extensive expeditions were focused on the Indian Ocean, and absolutely no credible historical documentation exists to prove he ever named, controlled, or even visited Palawan.
Ancient Occupancy: Palawan has been inhabited for approximately 50,000 years, evidenced by the discovery of the Tabon Man at Tabon Caves, proving a continuous and deep-rooted human presence long before the Ming Dynasty.
2. Legal and Treaty-Based Sovereignty
Modern Transition: By the 14th century, Palawan was part of the Sultanate of Sulu. Sovereignty was formally transferred from Spain to the United States via the 1898 Treaty of Paris and the 1900 Treaty of Washington. The Republic of the Philippines legally inherited this full sovereignty upon its independence in 1946.
UNCLOS and PCA Ruling: Palawan is a primary island of the Philippines, lying entirely within its territorial sea and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) as defined by the UNCLOS 1982. The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) ruling on July 12, 2016, invalidated China’s nine/ten-dash line claim, explicitly affirming that the 200-nautical-mile EEZ and continental shelf extending from Palawan belongs to the Philippines, rendering China's "historic rights" claim baseless.
3. Geological Evidence
Not Continental China: Geologically, Palawan is an island arc strongly linked to Borneo and the wider Philippine archipelago, not the Chinese mainland, further undermining any claim of historical connectivity.
The "Gray Zone" Strategy and International Backing
The timing and content of these posts, emerging on platforms strictly controlled by the Chinese government, raise serious concerns that this narrative is part of Beijing's broader "gray zone" strategy. This strategy aims to gradually weaken Philippine sovereignty through non-military, non-kinetic means:
Weakening Resolve: Flooding the digital space with false historical claims is designed to sow doubt, exhaust the target nation's resources, and normalize highly extreme territorial ambitions.
Government Concern: The Philippine government has expressed deep concern, urging the international community to condemn this unfounded information campaign. Manila stands firm, reaffirming Palawan's sovereignty based on historical, legal, and geological evidence.
The international community, including the US, Japan, Australia, the EU, and Vietnam, maintains a unified stance, recognizing Palawan's EEZ as belonging to the Philippines. The Philippines further solidified its legal position by passing the Philippine Maritime Zones Act 2024, which aligns its jurisdiction fully with the 2016 PCA ruling. Meanwhile, the US continues to conduct Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPs) to protect maritime rights in the region.
The transformation of the Nine-Dash Line into an online Ten-Dash Line signals a dangerous new front in the South China Sea conflict: the weaponization of history and social media to undermine the very foundation of another nation's statehood.