2024年11月2日晚上8点左右，济南某小区。         Screenshot from video obtained by the Global Times on July 21, 2026 shows the transfer of injured Philippine personnel near Ren'ai Jiao, which was overseen and assisted by the China Coast Guard. Photo: Courtesy of the China Coast GuardThe Philippine military side has again claimed that resupplying its grounded warship at Ren'ai Jiao needs no foreign approval and resupply there is within its self-claimed so-called EEZ, while Philippine media acknowledged that 15 "safe" resupply missions were made over the past two years under a China-Philippines provisional arrangement. 
Chinese experts warned on Wednesday that Manila should not mistake humanitarian accommodation for a concession and must bear the consequences if it scraps the arrangement.
Yang Xiao, a research fellow at the Institute of Peaceful Development under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times on Wednesday that the Philippine side's claims are fundamentally flawed from legal, historical and practical perspectives. 
Ren'ai Jiao is an inherent part of China's Nansha Qundao, over which China has indisputable and complete sovereignty, Yang said, adding that it is legally untenable for the Philippines to claim that Ren'ai Jiao is part of its exclusive economic zone.
"The Philippines deliberately grounded the abandoned warship at Ren'ai Jiao in 1999 and repeatedly pledged to remove it and restore the reef, but has failed to honor those commitments for more than two decades. This itself constitutes a continuing violation of China's territorial sovereignty," Yang said. 
This is not the first time the Philippines has denied seeking China's approval for resupply missions to Ren'ai Jiao. In April 2025, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun responded to similar claims, saying that China's position on how to handle the current situation at Ren'ai Jiao is clear and consistent.
"First, by keeping its warship grounded at Ren'ai Jiao for decades running, the Philippines has been violating China's sovereignty and the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC). We demand that the Philippines tow away the warship. Second, between now and when the warship is towed away, should the Philippines need to send living necessities, China is willing to allow it in a humanitarian spirit if the Philippines informs China in advance and after on-site verification is conducted. Third, if the Philippines were to send large amount of construction materials to the warship and attempt to build fixed facilities or permanent outpost, China will absolutely not accept it and will resolutely stop it in accordance with the law and regulations," said the spokesperson.
"This means that the Philippines' so-called '15 safe and incident-free resupply missions' were all made possible by China's humanitarian accommodation and strict oversight," Yang stressed. Each mission was reported in advance and allowed to proceed only after inspections confirmed no prohibited construction materials were aboard. The CCG intercepted any such materials through lawful measures, Yang said.
The Philippines' unilateral denial of its notification and inspection obligations while enjoying the arrangement's benefits amounts to a blatant breach of its commitments, the expert noted.
Yang also noted that Manila's narrative contains an obvious logical contradiction. If Philippine resupply missions were truly unimpeded, there would be no need for Manila to repeatedly claim that China had "blocked" its missions and call for international intervention. Yet if China had continuously "obstructed" the missions, the Philippines could not have completed 15 safe and incident-free resupply operations. 
"Manila has simply manipulated its narrative to suit its publicity needs, portraying itself as a 'victim' when seeking international attention while touting smooth resupply operations and its own strength when seeking to project toughness. Its hype over the 15 resupply missions is essentially aimed at rallying domestic support and stoking confrontation internationally to conceal the reality that its illegal presence is tightly constrained," Yang said.
China's handling of the Ren'ai Jiao situation, meanwhile, has consistently reflected restraint and humanitarian considerations. According to a statement by the China Coast Guard (CCG) spokesperson on the transfer of injured personnel by the Philippine side, Jiang Lue, a CCG spokesperson, said that on the morning of July 21, out of humanitarian considerations, China allowed the Philippines to transfer injured personnel by small boats from the BRP Sierra Madre (LT-57), which has been illegally grounded at Ren'ai Jiao, to Philippine Coast Guard vessel 9702. The CCG questioned and verified the Philippine vessels and monitored the entire process.
The CCG will continue to carry out rights-protection and law enforcement operations in accordance with the law in the waters around Ren'ai Jiao to safeguard China's territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests, Jiang said.
Yang said, stressing that Manila's tough talk and one-sided claims cannot make up for its legal and moral shortcomings.
"Any attempt to permanently occupy Chinese islands and reefs, unilaterally tear up the understanding and continuously challenge China's territorial sovereignty runs counter to international law and the broader trend toward peace and development in the region and is ultimately doomed to fail," Yang added.
。

二 | 年近七旬的王某在小区里跑步，跑进了儿童娱乐区。两岁多的彤彤正跟着父亲在小广场玩，突然转身走向秋千。

三 | 王某躲避不及，径直撞倒了孩子，自己也重重摔倒在地。王某被诊断为左股骨骨折，住院治疗花了不少钱。

四 | 事后他把彤彤和孩子的父母告上法庭，索赔5万多。今年8月，法院判了：驳回王某的全部诉讼请求。

跑错了地方很多人第一反应是：“老人摔骨折了也挺惨的，怎么一分钱都不赔？”但看了事实经过，你就知道法院判得有道理。这个小区公共区域功能划分非常清楚，专门划了塑胶跑道，上面还印着“一起奔跑吧”的字样。而事发的小广场东南侧，立着醒目的安全提示牌，清清楚楚写着：此处是儿童娱乐区。

五 | 塑胶跑道是给成年人跑步的，儿童区是给孩子玩的。王某作为成年人，完全知道自己该去哪。但他偏偏绕开了塑胶跑道，跑进了儿童娱乐区。

六 | 法院为什么判老人全责？庭审中，彤彤的父母说了一番话，句句在理：第一、事发区域明确标注是儿童游乐区，有清晰的安全警示。王某明知是儿童活动区，还违规跑进来。第二、王某快七十了，身体机能和反应能力都在下降，本身就不适合在儿童密集的区域跑步。第三、两岁的孩子在儿童区玩，挣脱爸爸的手跑向秋千——这是再正常不过的事。孩子不是突然冲上马路，是在自己的活动区里正常走动。法院审理后认定：王某刻意规避专属跑道，擅自进入风险更高的儿童娱乐区跑步，跑动中又疏于观察周围环境，是事故发生的全部原因。至于彤彤的爸爸，法院认为他全程贴身陪护，孩子瞬间挣脱是普通家长无法提前预判的突发情况，不应过度苛责监护人。

七 | 再谈跑步安全这个案子给我们所有跑者提了个醒，跑步安全的重要性，不言而喻。第一，去该去的地方跑。有塑胶跑道，就别跑人行道；有专用步道，就别跑儿童区。小区的功能分区不是摆设，每条路都有自己的用途。第二，跑之前先看环境。尤其是人多的公园跑步时，一定要注意安全。

八 | 没法加速时，就只能慢跑，因为人多，尤其是小孩子会横冲直撞，等反应过来已经来不及了。第三，夜跑把自己“亮”出来。天黑跑步，记得穿件带反光条的衣服。是为了让开车的、骑车的、散步的人能看见你。你看见了别人，不代表别人也能看见你。写在最后这个案子，法院判得清清楚楚——谁违规，谁担责。跑步是好事，但跑步不能“跑”掉规矩。守规矩，不只是对别人的尊重，更是对自己的保护。