FACT CHECK: Collision shown in video not between China, PH ships

Claim: A video shows the collision of two ships from the Philippines and China. 

Rating: FALSE

Why we fact-checked this: The claim can be found in a video uploaded on December 17 by the YouTube channel “PH TV,” with 11,428 views, 456 likes, and 120 comments as of writing. 

The video is titled, “Naku po! Barko ng Pilipinas binangga ng Chinese Maritime Militia | PCG tumangging iwanan ang WPS” (Philippine ship hit by Chinese Maritime Militia | PCG refused to leave WPS). 

The video’s narrator claims that the collision occurred recently after the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) attempted to get through an alleged blockade by China. Between the 0:26 to 0:42 timestamps, the following image can be seen:

The facts: Contrary to the video’s claim, the collision shown in the video involves a Chinese fishing boat and one of two Japanese Coast Guard ships. The incident, which took place on September 7, 2010, near a disputed chain of islands in the East China Sea, led to the arrest of the Chinese boat’s captain and eventually to a major diplomatic issue between China and Japan at the time. The leakage of the video showing the collision was also controversial back then. (READ: How were maritime collisions dealt with before?)

2010 news items and videos: Here are examples of news items and videos showing images of the 2010 collision seen in the misleading video by “PH TV”:

• An article by the Japan Times titled “Coast guard unsettled by video leak” published on November 6, 2010 (full article archived here);
• A video uploaded on the YouTube channel “Sankei News” on November 5, 2010, which shows the image at 0:22;
• A video uploaded on the YouTube channel “tm3172” on November 9, 2010, which shows the image at 1:37.

Also, most of the TinEye reverse image search results indicated that these images were dated 2010, during the time of the reported incident. 

Other inaccurate information: At the 1:09 mark, the video by “PH TV” also claimed that the PCG ship BRP Sindangan was hit by a Chinese militia vessel. 

There are no recent reported incidents of a collision involving the BRP Sindangan. It was, however, involved in a tense encounter and near collision with Chinese ships in October.

The most recent incident between the two countries took place on December 10, when a Chinese Coast Guard vessel rammed a Philippine ship on a resupply mission to Ayungin Shoal, but it was the Unaizah Mae 1, not the BRP Sindangan. The Chinese vessel also fired a water cannon at the M/L Kalayaan, which had to be towed back by BRP Sindangan due to severe damage.

Reports of Chinese aggression have risen in recent months, as China continues to reject the 2016 arbitral ruling striking down its expansive claims over the South China Sea.

Previous related fact-checks: This December alone, Rappler has fact-checked several false claims related to the maritime conflict between the Philippines and China:

• FACT CHECK: No US Coast Guard ship deployed vs China in West PH Sea (December 20, 2023)
• FACT CHECK: Video shows Indian navy ship in New Zealand, not in PH (December 20, 2023)
• FACT CHECK: No Marcos declaration of war vs China over West PH Sea incidents (December 19, 2023)
• FACT CHECK: US warship did not destroy Chinese drones in West PH Sea (December 19, 2023)
• FACT CHECK: PH, US did not sink 15 Chinese ships off Pag-asa Island (December 3, 2023)

– Percival Bueser/ Rappler.com 

Percival Bueser is a graduate of Rappler’s fact-checking mentorship program. This fact check was reviewed by a member of Rappler’s research team and a senior editor. Learn more about Rappler’s fact-checking mentorship program here.

Keep us aware of suspicious Facebook pages, groups, accounts, websites, articles, or photos in your network by contacting us at factcheck@rappler.com. You may also report dubious claims to #FactsFirstPH tipline by messaging Rappler on Facebook or Newsbreak via Twitter direct message. You may also report through our Viber fact check chatbot. Let us battle disinformation one Fact Check at a time.