U.S. and Philippine defence representatives meet at Camp Aguinaldo on March 28, 2025. File photo, not the Cebu ASEAN meeting. Display crop; use does not imply U.S. government endorsement. Madelyn Keech / U.S. Department of Defense / Wikimedia Commons / Public domain.
By Wang Jun
Undersea infrastructure is part of the security agenda the Philippines is bringing to this week’s ASEAN defence meetings in Cebu. Defence Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. identified it alongside South China Sea developments and maritime security. The subject reaches beyond naval encounters: damage to a cable can disrupt communications used by people and businesses across borders.
The ministerial meetings are scheduled for October 28 and 29 in Lapu-Lapu City. Earlier accounts covered a wider October 26–30 programme; those dates should not be confused with the two principal ministerial sessions. ASEAN’s Secretariat and the Philippine government broadcaster identify the 28th and 29th for the meetings themselves.
Cooperation is broader than the attendance list
At an October 21 seminar in Washington, Philippine diplomat Felipe Cariño III said Manila was exploring cooperation with Taiwan to protect undersea cables. The areas discussed included knowledge-sharing and capacity-building. Exploring such cooperation does not mean an operational arrangement has already been signed.
Nor does it give Taiwan a seat at ADMM-Plus. The forum involves ASEAN members and eight partner countries; Taiwan is not a formal participant. Bilateral technical contact and membership of a regional defence mechanism are separate matters.
The distinction matters because nearby jurisdictions may share concerns about a communications route while having different diplomatic relationships. They can discuss particular risks without thereby changing the membership rules of a multilateral institution.
Concern about a ship is not proof of sabotage
The original account connected interest in infrastructure security with Philippine concerns about the Chinese research vessel Jia Hai Ke 7. Those concerns do not establish that the vessel damaged a cable or carried out a sabotage operation. AHR has not verified evidence of such an act.
A security discussion can address surveillance, incident reporting and repair coordination without prejudging responsibility for a particular incident. If governments make accusations, the supporting observations and the limits of what they establish should remain clear.
For the public, a useful outcome would be a more reliable response when communications fail: knowing who receives a report, how authorities share information and how repair work can proceed. These are practical tests for future cooperation, not measures already agreed at this meeting.
China’s attendance information has changed
An earlier Philippine briefing left Chinese participation unconfirmed. China’s Ministry of National Defense subsequently announced on October 27 that its defence attaché in the Philippines would attend ADMM-Plus on October 29. The earlier uncertainty should therefore not be presented as the current position.
The regional gathering offers a place to discuss risks even where political views diverge. Whether it produces a specific infrastructure initiative will depend on the final documents and follow-up. As of this edited edition, proposals and statements about the agenda should not be mistaken for completed agreements.
Sources and editorial note
Bilingual editorial edition of Wang Jun’s Medium contribution. AHR has reorganised the wording, added source notes and updated China’s representation. This is not an AHR on-site interview; the original contribution and verification sources are linked below.
Wang Jun — Medium original / 刊物原稿
Radyo Pilipinas: ministerial schedule, October 27
Reuters: Philippine diplomat’s public remarks, October 21
Singapore MINDEF: underwater infrastructure cooperation, May 30
More on the Cebu defence meetings: Read our coverage of China’s representation and its diplomatic significance; ADMM-Plus cooperation and the tests for useful dialogue.