Manila has lodged a sharp diplomatic protest against China Daily over an artificial intelligence-generated video posted to the state-run outlet's Facebook account on July 10 that portrayed Filipinos as primates in dehumanising and racist imagery. The Philippine government, through its foreign ministry, characterised the content as "deeply offensive, distressing, and unacceptable," drawing what it described as a firm line against such dehumanising depictions and demanding immediate removal of the material. The incident has escalated existing tensions between the two nations amid already fraught relations stemming from competing territorial claims and aggressive maritime confrontations in the South China Sea.
The controversial video depicted a monkey dressed in Filipino clothing being manipulated by animated arms representing the United States and Japan, directing what the primate should perform. The sequence escalated by labelling the character "stupid" before it pulled a sheet containing text referencing the "South China Sea arbitration award"—a reference to the landmark 2016 arbitral tribunal ruling that invalidated China's extensive territorial claims in the strategic waterway. The imagery culminated in the monkey being thrown into the sea and struck by a vessel's water cannon, a sequence that analysts view as celebrating violence against the Philippine state and military personnel.
Philippine Defence Secretary Gilberto Teodoro issued a particularly scathing condemnation, describing the material as "contemptible propaganda" and declaring it "a disgrace to any State that claims to exercise responsible regional leadership." Teodoro characterised the video as symptomatic of deeper governmental dysfunction, arguing that the resort to racist and dehumanising tactics reveals Beijing's inability to substantiate its territorial ambitions through legitimate means. His remarks suggested that the propaganda effort underscores a strategic failure—that China has abandoned reasoned argument and legal justification in favour of manufactured hostility and inflammatory messaging.
The Defence Secretary's statement further escalated the rhetorical temperature by accusing China's propaganda apparatus of "moral and intellectual bankruptcy." He emphasised that the video's mockery of the 2016 Arbitral Award—which was issued by an international tribunal and found China's claims to lack legal basis—combined with its apparent glorification of violence, reveals what Manila views as the fundamental weakness of Beijing's position. Teodoro suggested that confident, secure governments do not resort to such tactics, implying that China's behaviour reflects desperation rather than strength or legitimacy.
The timing of the video's release carries particular significance within regional diplomatic calendars. The posting coincided with Philippine commemorations marking the tenth anniversary of the 2016 arbitral ruling, a date of profound symbolic importance for Manila. The arbitration, brought before the Permanent Court of Arbitration by the Philippines under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, rejected China's "nine-dash line" claim that encompasses approximately ninety percent of the South China Sea. Beijing has consistently rejected this ruling, refusing to acknowledge its legitimacy or binding nature, a stance that continues to underpin Beijing-Manila disputes.
Teorador's broader assessment characterised recent Chinese government behaviour as "schizophrenic," suggesting erratic oscillation between diplomatic engagement and aggressive confrontation. He argued that such conduct disqualifies China from being regarded as either a secure actor capable of measured response or a trustworthy regional partner capable of honouring commitments and respecting international norms. The Defence Secretary's language reflects growing Philippine frustration with what Manila perceives as Beijing's unpredictable and increasingly hostile posture across multiple domains of interaction.
The incident arrives amid an already deteriorating bilateral relationship marked by persistent maritime tensions and escalating sanctions. Beijing has previously imposed punitive measures targeting Teodoro personally, reflecting the personalised nature of the dispute. Recent flashpoints have included multiple confrontations between Philippine and Chinese vessels in contested waters, aggressive manoeuvres by Chinese maritime assets, and the installation of a floating barrier at the entrance to Scarborough Shoal—a feature Manila protested until its removal. These recurring incidents have created a pattern of tit-for-tat escalations that threaten to destabilise the broader region.
The Chinese Embassy in Manila did not immediately provide comment or response to inquiries regarding the video's content or the Philippine government's demands for its removal. This silence, whether diplomatic strategy or oversight, has left the episode unresolved at the official bilateral level. The absence of swift acknowledgement or explanation allows interpretations suggesting either indifference to Philippine sensitivities or deliberate maintenance of inflammatory messaging as part of a broader strategic communication campaign.
For Malaysian observers and policymakers, this episode carries implications beyond bilateral Philippines-China relations. The incident exemplifies how rising geopolitical competition in Southeast Asia increasingly manifests through cultural and ethnic messaging rather than purely military or economic competition. The deployment of AI-generated content combining racist stereotyping with political messaging represents a new frontier in information warfare that could eventually extend to other Southeast Asian nations. Malaysia, which also maintains territorial disputes with China and complex diplomatic balancing acts, faces potential risk from similar campaigns as Beijing seeks to mobilise domestic and regional opinion against neighbouring states it views as insufficiently aligned with its interests. The Philippines' firm response and public condemnation may establish important precedent for how Southeast Asian governments should respond to dehumanising propaganda, signalling that such tactics carry diplomatic costs rather than remaining consequence-free expressions of state frustration.
