A New Delhi-based regional think tank, Observer Research Foundation, believes the administration of President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. has been demonstrating a commitment to secure the West Philippine Sea (WPS) based on international law and exercising Manila’s sovereignty and sovereign rights over the maritime domain, at a time when China has been expanding its clout.
It said the success of its pushback against Beijing is being achieved through a framing of the WPS dispute through a people-centric lens which has won support from the Filipino people, which is a crucial element in policy directions.
By illustrating the intent to play a more prominent role in keeping the Indo-Pacific’s maritime domain free, open, and rules-based, more robust ties with like-minded traditional and non-traditional partners that share the same goals were forged.
More importantly, the Marcos administration has simultaneously endeavored to illustrate the Philippines’ efforts to enhance its growing security alignments by consistently highlighting an approach that is defense-oriented rather than bloc politics-driven, according to the review.
It said that while Manila has been expanding its policy options to secure the WPS, there are concerns about whether such a strategy can be sustained in the long term given the possibility of a new administration that will succeed Marcos in 2028 and the potential electoral victory of Donald Trump in the US.
“These concerns are heightened by the fact that China is likely to exploit any inconsistencies in Manila’s approach. Therefore, to ensure general continuity in the Philippines’ strategy, it will be necessary to institutionalize partnerships and continue building on national resilience,” according to the paper.
Don McLain Gill, a geopolitical analyst, author, and a lecturer at the Department of International Studies, De La Salle University, Manila, said the Philippines will have to focus on efforts at resilience in both economics and defense considering the chances of another Donald Trump presidency.
Gill indicated Trump has a particular disdain for multilateral and regional security and economic cooperation due to concerns over free-riding and of US interests being undermined.
He recalled the first Trump administration wanted Washington’s treaty allies, like Japan and South Korea, to pay more for American security.
In an interview with Time last April, Trump reiterated a continuation of his protectionist and transactional foreign policy if he prevails in the November polls this year.
Manila will have to anticipate the strategic implications for Philippine security and economy of a Trump administration.
If Manila seeks to gain more economically from its alliance with the US, it must continue to improve the Philippines’ investment climate to guarantee better results from its growing commercial ties with Washington, the geopolitical expert noted.
“Under a Trump presidency, the concept behind friendshoring is unlikely to gain traction in Washington if the costs for American companies will be greater than the profits,” Gill said.
Indeed, even as friendshoring has become a trend under the administration of President Joe Biden, “countries like Vietnam and Indonesia have benefited significantly more from US and Japanese investments in Southeast Asia than the Philippines. This illustrates the need for the Marcos administration to maximize efforts in ensuring a conducive business climate in the country. This will improve the country’s long-term economic prospects as well.”
Regarding defense, while the Philippines has benefited from importing arms, the government must pursue agreements with its partners that involve potential technology transfers and joint production. Such a move will enhance the Philippines’ prospects of revitalizing its defense industry, and thereby lessen its dependence on defense deals based exclusively on a buyer-seller relationship.
However, simultaneous efforts must also be made by Manila to invest in research and innovation while improving the skill sets of its labor force to match the required capacity in laying the foundations of a basic industrial base for defense.
The factors that must be considered in resolving the WPS conflict must go beyond the clash on entitlement which is already taxing but must include geopolitical realities that are no less daunting.