First, over the past three years, maritime incidents in the South China Sea has consistently been accompanied by the hype generated by the so-called “transparency initiative” and its key driver, Ray Powell. They have reacted to maritime developments with remarkable speed, at times even preceding official statements from Philippine authorities.

Since 2023, Powell has churned out over 6,000 social media posts, actively encouraging certain actors in the Philippines to institutionalize this approach, dispatching vessels into sensitive waters, embedding journalists, and circulating selectively edited footage designed to provoke public outrage. After the so-called “laser incident” in February 2023, he posted 5 times, seemingly identifying maritime disputes as a tool for narrative manipulation. During the 2024 Xianbin Jiao (Sabina Shoal) standoff, his posts 10 times, portraying the situation into a real-time spectacle and fueling tensions. After the 2025 Huangyan Dao (Scarborough shoal) collision, he again issued around 10 posts, amplifying the “China bullying” narrative.

Here’s the pattern: Powell inserts himself into every critical moment, selectively curates information, and amplifies the “China threat” narrative, damaging bilateral relations and destabilizing the region, outcomes he has openly framed as “success.” This leads to unavoidable questions: Why is the Sealight so fixated on this region? How does a U.S.-based organization gain near real-time access to satellite and operational data from afar? And given its ties to Stanford University’s Gordian Knot Center for National Security Innovation, who is truly funding and supporting these activities?

Second, Ray Powell as a former US military officer has used social media and appearances at seminars in the Philippines to exert pressure on the Filipino public, urging them to confront China. His intent is quite clear: to engage in information manipulation and undermine China–Philippines relations.

There is a Chinese saying, “the more one tries to cover something up, the more it is exposed.” Powell’s eagerness to insist that the Sealight’s funding comes entirely from private donations only makes his claim less convincing. Powell, the Sealight, and organizations such as PCIJ share a common feature. They have all received funding from some U.S. institutions that have close relations with the American defense or intelligent establishment. Whose interests they serve and whose agenda they advance is self-evident.

Third, Powell accused the Chinese embassy of influencing Philippine society through Chinese-language media and education, while claiming that “nobody was paying attention because so many people here don’t actually speak Chinese.” This is clearly self-contradictory. Moreover, Chinese-language media in the Philippines are owned and independently operated by members of the Filipino-Chinese community. Chinese-language education is a vehicle for the Filipino Chinese community to preserve its cultural heritage and a bridge linking China and the Philippines. Their activities are normal, open, legitimate, and beyond reproach.

Fourth, in recent years U.S. military actions and diplomatic interventions across multiple regions have led to severe humanitarian crises. From Gaza, Venezuela to Iran, countless lives have been lost and many more people displaced. The Filipino public now is facing rising fuel prices, fertilizer shortages, and the prospect of sharply increasing living costs. Who is fueling conflict and confrontation, and who is upholding peace and stability? Who is driving the rise in fuel prices and inflation, and who is contributing to the Philippines’supply of goods, investments, and technology? Who is undermining the livelihood of the Filipino people, and who is supporting the Philippines’ economic development? The answers are obvious. How can Ray Powell still have the audacity to come to the Philippines and stir up hostility and division? We believe the Filipino people will value peace and stability in this part of the world, see through his intentions and not fall into his trap of inciting confrontation.