Introduction
President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. of the Philippines plays a crucial role in the intricate geopolitical dynamics of Southeast Asia.
The administration’s strategic realignment towards strengthening ties with the United States represents a notable change in regional politics, especially in light of the escalating rivalry between the United States and China.
The reconfiguration is driven by the wider involvement of the United States in the area, as demonstrated by initiatives like the AUKUS security agreement involving Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States.
Although the Philippines is not directly participating in AUKUS, the agreement highlights the potential advantages that Manila could gain from military and strategic collaboration, particularly considering its ongoing maritime conflicts with Beijing.
The bolstered US military presence in the area, backed by agreements such as AUKUS, acts as a deterrent to China’s aggressive territorial assertions, particularly in the South China Sea. The sea in question serves as a focal point in the diplomatic relations between the Philippines and China, thus making the support of the United States vital to Manila’s strategy of deterrence.
Marcos Jr. aims to utilize the advantageous position of the Philippines to optimize its diplomatic and security advantages, by aligning more closely with US interests in order to strengthen its regional position.
Not So Easy
Nevertheless, the possibility of Donald Trump returning to the presidency in the United States brings about a sense of uncertainty regarding the changing security condition.
During Trump’s previous term, there were notable changes towards isolationism, evident in his decision to withdraw from international agreements and his skepticism towards long-established alliances.
An exemplary instance was his choice to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a decision that was widely perceived as a withdrawal from the United States’ involvement in shaping regional economic frameworks and countering China’s increasing influence in the Asia-Pacific region.
Moreover, Trump’s lack of clear commitment to NATO and his confrontational requests for member nations to augment their defense expenditures demonstrated a more general unwillingness to participate in collaborative endeavors. The President’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement has further strengthened this pattern, indicating a potential scaling back of US participation in international obligations, which may be reinstated if he assumes office again.
The potential consequences of a Trump presidency have significant implications for the Philippines. Trump’s policies of isolationism may result in a decrease in the United States’ defense obligations, including those pertaining to the South China Sea.
This region holds significant importance for the Philippines, not only because of its ongoing territorial conflicts with China but also as a crucial passageway for global commerce.
If there is any uncertainty in the support provided by the United States, Marcos Jr. may need to adjust his foreign policy. This could involve seeking new alliances or enhancing the country’s military capabilities within its own borders to make up for the perceived withdrawal of US support.
If Trump’s isolationist approaches are reinstated, Marcos Jr.’s foreign policy strategy, which currently depends heavily on US support, could be at risk. The Philippines could be vulnerable if the United States reduces or withdraws its military presence, particularly in light of its recent assertive position against China.
This revelation may be interpreted within the country as a setback to Marcos Jr.’s plan to strengthen the Philippines’ global reputation and improve its security, which could potentially result in political instability domestically.
Internally, the political dynamics within the Philippines are highly responsive to changes in foreign policy. Marcos Jr.’s predecessor, Rodrigo Duterte, had developed stronger relations with China, moving away from the traditionally pro-US foreign policy path of the Philippines.
Duterte’s adoption of a pro-China policy was a strategic move aimed at expanding the Philippines’ diplomatic ties and decreasing its dependence on the United States.
If Marcos Jr.’s strategy, which is aligned with the United States, is unsuccessful in obtaining the expected support due to changes in US policy under a potential Trump administration, it may result in a revival of pro-China sentiment within the country, potentially led by Duterte or his political allies.
This has the potential to stimulate opposition movements and shape public opinion, resulting in a substantial transformation of the political environment. These changes have the potential to undermine Marcos Jr.’s legislative agenda and impact the electoral prospects of both him and his political allies.
Therefore, it is emphasized that there is a requirement for a well-rounded and adaptable foreign policy that can respond to changes in the global landscape while protecting the interests of the nation.
It Is All about Hedging
For Marcos Jr., effectively managing the delicate balance of international alliances, regional tensions and domestic political pressures is of utmost importance. Ineffectively handling these aspects could potentially lead to the Philippines becoming isolated on the global stage and undermine trust and confidence within the country, which would have negative consequences for the overall stability and effectiveness of the administration.
Aligning with the United States and taking a more assertive position on China signify substantial shifts from the previous administration’s approach. Trump’s return could disrupt this strategic positioning, making Marcos Jr. susceptible to domestic scrutiny and political obstacles.
The relationship between the Philippines’ foreign policy and its domestic political landscape is a constantly changing and flexible process, shaped by worldwide political patterns, regional security issues and internal political considerations. Essentially, Marcos Jr.’s foreign policy maneuver is a risky strategy with both positive and negative consequences.
Although there are advantages to aligning with the United States, relying too heavily on this partnership – considering the unpredictable nature of US politics – could result in significant challenges both domestically and internationally.
To successfully navigate this intricate terrain, it is essential to employ a sophisticated and flexible foreign policy strategy that can effectively protect the interests of the Philippines, irrespective of any changes in its relationships with major global powers.
The ASEAN Conundrum
In addition to the domestic and bilateral challenges discussed, an alignment with the United States places the Philippines in a precarious position within ASEAN.
Historically, the grouping has pursued a strategy of hedging—balancing relationships between major powers to avoid overt partiality and to maintain regional stability and autonomy. This strategy has allowed ASEAN Member States (AMS) to leverage relationships with both the United States and China, gaining benefits from each without becoming overly reliant on either.
However, putting all eggs on the US basket risks straining the Philippines’ relations with ASEAN. This shift could be perceived by other AMS as a departure from ASEAN’s traditional collective stance of neutrality and non-confrontation.
Such a perception might lead to diplomatic friction, as other AMS may be concerned about the implications of the Philippines’ US alignment for their own security and regional dynamics.
Moreover, ASEAN’s cautious approach to China contrasts sharply with the more confrontational stance that the Philippines is adopting under Marcos Jr. This divergence could isolate the Philippines within ASEAN and potentially reducing its influence in regional forums. In an organization that operates by consensus, the lack of alignment with the broader group could diminish the Philippines’ ability to shape regional policies and initiatives.
This potential isolation within ASEAN could compound the vulnerabilities Marcos Jr. faces due to potential shifts in the United States’ policy. If the superpower were to retract its military and strategic commitments in the region, the Philippines would find itself doubly disadvantaged—lacking both the robust backing of the United States and the supportive buffer traditionally provided by ASEAN.
Such a scenario could necessitate a recalibration of Marcos Jr.’s foreign policy to realign more closely with ASEAN’s principles of hedging and neutrality, or to seek strengthened bilateral relationships within the group.
Conclusion
Therefore, while Marcos Jr.’s alignment with the United States offers potential security benefits, it also introduces complexities into the Philippines’ regional relationships, particularly with ASEAN.
Balancing these relationships will require a nuanced approach to diplomacy that respects ASEAN’s collective ethos while safeguarding the Philippines’ national interests. Navigating this delicate balance is essential to ensure that the Philippines remains a proactive and respected member of the regional community, capable of influencing outcomes and advancing its national agenda in a rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape.
