THE China Coast Guard attacked a Philippine Coast Guard vessel via water cannon on Aug 5 within the Philippine exclusive economic zone, the latest in a string of provocations and aggressions. How did we get to this point in the two countries’ diplomatic relations?
As always, I aim to provide a psychological or behavioural lens to Philippine national issues as my fellow columnists who are experts in law, political science, and diplomacy will do a much better job dissecting those aspects.
What did strike me with this development is that, sadly, this is no longer surprising and somewhat to be expected given that we have been in the business of acquiescing to China ever since the previous administration.
We had a historic opportunity when the arbitral ruling was awarded in our favour over our maritime disputes with China on July 12 – the Philippines celebrated the anniversary of this ruling this year.
However, the government at that time had not taken any steps towards enforcing this ruling and had even assured China that they would not enforce it. This started a particularly troubling dynamic with China that ultimately led them to double down on their claims in 2023.
There is a rudimentary concept in psychology called the “foot-in-the-door” phenomenon. It describes how initially agreeing to small favours leads to agreeing to bigger favours, even if it is against one’s own interests. This is a classic strategy in sales and persuasion.
One first asks for a favour so small and convenient that the person would have a hard time justifying a “no”. For example, asking for P5 (five Philippine pesos) would rarely garner a negative reaction. At this point, you already have your “foot” in the “door”. Then you could proceed to ask for bigger amounts. Perhaps another P10. Then a P20. Then P100. Then P500.
According to this phenomenon, you are more likely to be successful at ultimately receiving P500 this way rather than asking for P500 at the beginning. It is important to note that there is also a complementary strategy called “door-in-the-face” where you start with an outrageous ask (let’s say P5,000) then negotiating down to P500, even though this was the amount you originally intended to ask for.What has this got to do with diplomatic relations?
Diplomatic relations are all about negotiation. As such, tactics of persuasion are central. By acquiescing to small asks and favours that go against our national interests, we are setting ourselves up to being taken advantage of in bigger ways.
A big part of why such tactics work, in a way, is our value of wanting to be nice. As the Sondheim song goes, “You’re not good, you’re not bad, you’re just nice”. By wanting to play nice with China, we have put our coast guards and fishermen at risk, a really bad thing to do.
People often mistake niceness for either kindness or goodness but that is not the case. Niceness mostly concerns itself with being pleasant and not wishing to offend. The danger of this value is that sometimes we privilege not wanting to offend so much that we allow injustices to prevail. We avoid confrontation even when it’s necessary because we want to play nice. Niceness has its merits, but it should also have its limits. Niceness at the expense of protecting human and sovereign rights is unjust.
Niceness is also not kindness. Kindness is not concerned with how others react to us but has a more intrinsic motivation. At its core, it is wanting to do something good for others. True kindness does not seek an audience and mostly prefers to be invisible. We don’t have to be petty or solely selfish in our diplomatic negotiations. We can choose to be kind through the willingness to negotiate. Merely giving in, however, for fear of offending the other party is not kindness but just kowtowing.
Niceness is fundamentally different from goodness. There are many ways to understand and practice goodness. In diplomatic relations, we have to prioritize the good of our people. We also have to prioritize the good of vulnerable groups that need the protection of the government. The ideal – but harder – path is where the solution is for the good of all.
This is where niceness can jeopardise goodness because niceness tends to prefer avoidance of unpleasant things, which usually steers us towards short-term solutions and sacrificing leverage in the long run.
Filipinos are known for being nice and hospitable. Yet we should not do that at the expense of our own interests. Being good and kind sometimes requires taking firm – and unpleasant – stands for the welfare of our country. – Philippine Daily Inquirer/Asia News Network
Anna Cristina Tuazon is a psychologist and columnist with the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
Credit: The Star : News Feed
