In early July 2026, Japan and the Philippines' move to delimit maritime rights and interests in the waters east of Taiwan triggered a full-scale academic debate within China over the sovereignty of the Batan Islands. A dedicated symposium convened by the Center for Philippine Studies at Jinan University reached the consensus that, in law, the Batan Islands belong to China's Taiwan Island. This is no isolated incident — it is the opening move of a fǔ dǐ chōu xīn (釜底抽薪, literally "pulling the firewood out from under the cauldron") strategy on the Philippines question: by contesting the legal attribution of the Batan Islands, Beijing aims to cut away the territorial foundation on which the Philippines' entire South China Sea claim rests.
1. The Trigger — Japan–Philippines Delimitation Provokes an Academic Response
On June 30, 2026, the Institute of Regional and Country Studies and the Center for Philippine Studies of the School of International Relations at Jinan University held a closed-door meeting in Guangzhou titled "Academic Symposium on the Sovereignty of Batan Island Against the Background of Japan–Philippines Maritime Delimitation." Three core consensuses from the meeting were subsequently made public:
- To systematically examine the relevant questions at the academic level and produce a legal response in service of major national strategic needs;
- The unanimous view that, in law, the Batan Islands belong to China's Taiwan Island;
- That the Chinese government possesses sovereignty over the Batan Islands and the nearby Babuyan Islands.
The news quickly drew wide attention. That same day, the commentator Tu Zhuxi ("Chairman Tu") released a video placing the episode within a "一锅端" ("scooping out the entire pot in one go") narrative framework — Japan and the Philippines had delimitated recklessly, and Chinese academia had answered by "discussing the sovereignty of the Batan Islands."
The legal basis on which Japan and the Philippines delimited maritime rights and interests east of Taiwan is the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) regime under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). And the foundational principle of UNCLOS is "the land dominates the sea" — a maritime claim must rest on a base point of territory that rises above the water.
2. Shen Yi's Legal Framework — Natural Frontiers vs. Man-Made Nations
In a livestream on July 9, Shen Yi offered a systematic legal deconstruction of the episode. His analytical framework represents an entirely new line of argument among the existing Wiki pages.
2.1 The Territorial Boundaries of a Man-Made Nation Are Fixed
Shen Yi draws a decisive distinction: naturally formed states and states artificially created by colonizers operate on entirely different logics of territorial definition.
A naturally formed state — China, for instance — follows the "natural frontier" theory: over the long arc of history, the boundaries reached by human activity naturally settle into the borders of its territory. But for a man-made nation like the Philippines, the extent of its territory is rigidly locked in by the one or two international legal instruments — the treaties — that were in force at the moment of its creation: "the line is drawn on one side, and that is yours; your land ends here; your land may not expand to any point beyond this boundary."
Any territory beyond that line — including the Batan Islands — is territory the Philippines can claim on the basis of neither historical right nor international law.
"You cannot claim what does not exist. The Philippines was historically never a state — on what basis? Historically, it was never a state. Its national boundary was fixed, absolutely fixed: at the moment it was created, exactly how much of that homestead it would hold was already drawn on the map."
2.2 "Pulling the Firewood Out" — Undermining the Philippines' South China Sea Claims
Shen Yi points out that the reason the Philippines has been able to keep challenging China on the South China Sea question is that its single most essential card is to project maritime rights outward from the Batan Islands, on the basis of a 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone. If the sovereignty of the Batan Islands is repositioned — that is, if it is legally established that they belong to China's Taiwan Island — then the Philippines' entire edifice of claims in the South China Sea loses its footing.
This is the fǔ dǐ chōu xīn: first build the legal foundation through academic means, then let it support the political and diplomatic action that follows. China is not using warships to "seize" the islands; it is proving, in law, that the land was never the Philippines' to begin with.
2.3 The Leverage Logic of "Seek the Hammer and Get the Hammer"
The trigger path of the whole episode runs as follows: Japan and the Philippines proactively delimit east of Taiwan → Chinese think tanks launch an academic response → the legal analysis points to the sovereignty of the Batan Islands → the ground beneath the Philippines' South China Sea claims begins to crack.
Shen Yi sums this logic up in four characters — qiú chuí dé chuí (求锤得锤, "seek the hammer and get the hammer"): if you come looking to provoke, I will settle the account with you in earnest — and your ledger was never clean to begin with.
3. Background — US–Philippines Military Deployment on the Batan Islands
The strategic value of the Batan Islands lies not only in the legal dispute but also in their military geography.
The Batan Islands sit astride the Bashi Channel — the waterway between Taiwan and the Philippines — an extremely important passage for China's entry into and exit from the Western Pacific. From 2025 onward, the United States, for the first time, deployed shore-based anti-ship missile systems to the Batan Islands for exercises, aimed at Chinese warships transiting the Bashi Channel. This means that, within the US military's Western Pacific defense line, the Batan Islands are becoming the "last cork" after the Ryukyu (Okinawa) line contracts — running north to south, the American military presence in the Philippines is forming a new node of containment just south of Taiwan.
For this reason, Chinese academia's discussion of Batan Islands sovereignty cannot be read as a purely academic exercise. Strategically, it corresponds to the escalation of the US military posture in the northern Philippines — the academic debate supplies the legal framework and the discursive groundwork for the counter-measures that follow.
The US deploys shore-based anti-ship missiles on the Batan Islands → Japan and the Philippines delimit the waters east of Taiwan → Chinese academia launches sovereignty research → the legal analysis concludes the Batan Islands belong to China → a root-striking counter-move.
4. Complementarity with Existing Wiki Pages
This page complements several existing Wiki pages:
- A Historical-Legal Critique of the Philippines' South China Sea Territorial Claims — covers the legal critique of sovereignty claims over Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island) and the Nansha (Spratly) Islands, but does not address the Batan Islands;
- A Rehearsal of Intervention and Counter-Intervention — Balikatan 2026 and the South China Sea Denial Game — analyzes the South China Sea contest from the angle of military exercises, without touching the legal dimension;
- Submarine-Launched Strategic Missile Test — the same-day Julang (JL) missile test provides the backdrop of military deterrence.