Marcos Heads to US for Talks With Trump on Trade, Security
'I intend to convey to President Trump and his cabinet officials that the Philippines is ready to negotiate a bilateral trade deal that will ensure strong, mutually beneficial, and future-oriented collaborations that only the United States and the Philippines will be able to take advantage of,' Marcos said.
The three-day visit, which runs from July 20 to 22, will include meetings with US President Donald Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Marcos also emphasized that while the agenda will focus on defense and security, trade issues — especially the 20% tariff on Filipino goods — will be a key part of discussions.
'This visit reaffirms our commitment to fostering our long-standing alliances as an instrument of peace and a catalyst of development in the Asia-Pacific region and around the world,' he added.
Several American businesses are also seeking to meet with the Philippine leader, according to Department of Foreign Affairs Assistant Secretary Raquel Solano. Marcos is expected to invite Trump to attend the East Asia Summit, which the Philippines will host during its ASEAN chairmanship in 2026.
Marcos is the first ASEAN head of state to make an official visit to the US under Trump's current term.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fintech News ME
28 minutes ago
- Fintech News ME
Lean Technologies Among First to Gain UAE Approval Under New Open Finance Framework
Lean Technologies, a financial infrastructure provider based in the MENA region, has received In-Principle Approval (IPA) from the Central Bank of the UAE under the country's new Open Finance Framework. The IPA positions Lean as one of the first companies to offer regulated Open Finance services in the UAE, advancing its path toward full licensing. The approval comes as demand grows for faster, more transparent, and personalised financial services. Open Finance enables users to make payments, access credit, and manage finances through connected systems. Lean's infrastructure aims to support this shift by offering features such as instant account-to-account payments, quicker loan approvals, and financial tools built around data access and control. 'Open Finance is more than a technology upgrade. It's a foundation for a smarter, more innovative economy,' said Hisham Al-Falih, CEO and Co-Founder of Lean Technologies. 'By connecting customers, regulators, and businesses on a single, interoperable infrastructure, we're directly supporting the UAE's vision for a world-class digital financial system.' Since its founding, Lean has worked with regulators, banks, and fintechs to develop financial connectivity in the region. The company reports handling over US$2 billion in transaction volume and linking more than 1 million customer accounts. Its infrastructure underpins a range of use cases including payments, lending, and personal finance. 'With this approval, we're not just expanding our capabilities, we're expanding access,' Al-Falih added. 'We're enabling more people and businesses to participate fully in the digital economy.' Lean also supports the AlTareq initiative, a national programme to implement Open Finance infrastructure across the UAE. Its systems comply with ISO 27001 and SOC 2 standards and have demonstrated consistent API uptime and performance at scale. In 2022, Lean became the first third-party provider to receive a Financial Services Permission from Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM). It also joined the Saudi Central Bank's regulatory sandbox that year. The company has raised over US$100 million from investors including General Catalyst and Bain Capital Ventures and is expanding its regulated services across the Gulf region.
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
Trump's strategy for Middle East 'peace' is built on Israeli dominance. It will fail
The Trump administration is attempting to reshape the Middle East after launching strikes on Iran last month, adopting a strategy characterised by "peace through strength" and "commerce, not chaos". While this approach is presented as pragmatic, it risks destabilising the region in favour of maximising US and Israeli military and economic advantage. President Donald Trump considers himself an "expert dealmaker", believing that calculated military strikes create leverage for diplomatic gains - particularly by pressuring Iran back to the negotiating table. His strategy emphasises overwhelming but short-term military force to achieve defined goals, avoiding prolonged entanglements or "forever wars". It also marks a rejection of nation-building, shifting the burden of regional stability onto local partners. Though the strategic value of Middle Eastern energy resources has declined for the US, the region remains crucial - perhaps even more so under the current administration. As Med This Week reports, three primary factors shape recent US actions. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The first is the ideological alliance between far-right governments in the US and Israel, which transcends the traditional "special relationship" and reflects a deeper political and strategic alignment. The administration also views Israeli hegemony as a vehicle for regional stability, envisioning a dominant "Greater Israel", backed by overwhelming US support, capable of unilaterally enforcing peace and marginalising Iran. At its core, the Trump doctrine envisions a Greater Israel, backed by US power, enforcing peace and sidelining Iran Finally, personal financial interests - particularly those of Trump and his family - were prominently on display during his recent Gulf visit. The immediate objective of the 12-day war was to dismantle Iran's nuclear infrastructure and prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons. Trump declared key sites "destroyed" or "shut down", hailing the campaign as a critical blow against a perceived existential threat. (A recent US intelligence report found that only one of the three targeted nuclear facilities was completely destroyed, with the others expected to be operational again within months.) These military operations have significantly reshaped regional power dynamics, pushing forward the Trump administration's regional strategy: normalising relations between Israel and Arab states, particularly Saudi Arabia, and potentially extending to Oman, Indonesia, Qatar and even Syria. Yet this pursuit of realignment remains constrained by Israel's ongoing war on Gaza. A ceasefire and the release of Israeli hostages are seen as prerequisites for advancing and expanding normalisation. Israel: A hegemonic power? The US has demonstrated its willingness to act unilaterally with overwhelming force - particularly through the use of "bunker-buster" bombs on Iranian nuclear sites. This was portrayed as a show of unmatched American might, aimed not only at Iran but also as a deterrent to rivals like China and Russia. America's costly backing for Israel is enabling China's unstoppable rise Read More » Meanwhile, Israel has sought to project itself as a formidable military force with deep intelligence reach into Iran's nuclear and security infrastructure. Some Israeli officials have even claimed the country has joined the ranks of global powers, though the strikes, which killed large numbers of civilians, have drawn widespread criticism and raised questions about the legitimacy of such claims. Yet the question remains: can Israel truly become a hegemonic power in the region? Despite its recent operations and short-term tactical gains, Israel faces structural and political barriers to sustained dominance. It remains heavily reliant on US military, diplomatic and economic support. Deep-rooted regional conflicts persist, particularly the unresolved Palestinian issue, which continues to inflame public opinion and obstruct meaningful diplomatic engagement. Key regional powers such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt are unlikely to accept Israeli expansionism or hegemony. Meanwhile, Iran's political will to pursue its nuclear ambitions appears undiminished, with some analysts suggesting that the recent strikes may ultimately accelerate, rather than deter, its nuclear development. Iran's leadership, especially Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is unlikely to negotiate from a position of perceived weakness. The recent military escalation follows the US "maximum pressure" campaign and its hostile stance towards Iran after withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), or Iran nuclear deal, in 2018. Together, these developments have reinforced Iranian mistrust and further narrowed the space for diplomacy. Furthermore, there is no credible assessment that the recent strikes have permanently crippled Iran's nuclear programme. Many analysts believe any setbacks will last only months, not years, and that Iran will simply shift operations deeper underground. Roadblocks to dominance The unresolved Palestinian question remains the greatest obstacle to expanding the Abraham Accords and achieving regional peace. Saudi Arabia has made its position clear: it demands an unambiguous commitment to establishing a Palestinian state. Yet the Netanyahu government - shaped by ultra-right forces - prioritises military dominance over meaningful negotiations, particularly in Gaza and the West Bank. Israel's military assault on Gaza has inflamed Arab public opinion, making normalisation politically costly for Gulf leaders. Without a clear post-war vision for Gaza and a comprehensive ceasefire, Israeli dominance is unsustainable. Follow Middle East Eye's live coverage of the Israel-Palestine war Regional actors, especially in the Gulf, fear appearing complicit with a state widely viewed as violating Arab rights. Israel's prolonged war in Gaza and lack of a political roadmap have tarnished its global image, leading to growing international condemnation and even weakening support from traditional allies like the EU (though it declined to take any action). Israel's military assault on Gaza has inflamed Arab public opinion, making normalisation politically costly for Gulf leaders The erosion of diplomatic support for Israel - alongside the continued refusal to hold it accountable for its war crimes - has only furthered its isolation, undermining any bid for genuine regional leadership. Meanwhile, Israeli national security doctrine under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu relies on military superiority as the only guarantee of peace. But even claimed military "victories" come at staggering human and economic costs - both for Palestinians and for Israelis. Even if external military actions temporarily consolidate internal support - as seen in Iran - they often fail to trigger regime change or long-term stability. Decades of foreign interventions have shown that externally imposed political transitions are more likely to produce chaos than lasting peace. Regional and internal pressures have compounded the challenges facing Israel's hegemonic ambitions. Gulf states, wary of Iranian collapse, fear the resulting chaos, humanitarian crisis, refugee flows and nuclear proliferation. Domestically, Netanyahu faces mounting pressure amid public frustration over his failure to secure a full ceasefire in Gaza or release all hostages - exposing internal fractures that challenge any coherent long-term strategy. Crucially, Israel has not established a legitimate Palestinian governing authority to assume control of Gaza, nor has it succeeded in imposing external or co-opted leadership. The result is chaos and the emergence of new resistance movements - mirroring US failures in Iraq and Afghanistan. Regional defiance Saudi Arabia has remained unwilling to embrace Israeli ambitions, insisting that any normalisation must be preceded by a concrete commitment to establishing a Palestinian state. However, Israel's aggression has made further agreements politically untenable. Gulf states must act to avoid Israel's war on Iran spiralling into chaos Hadi Kahalzadeh Read More » Some Gulf countries are reassessing their approach to Israel, questioning whether its actions foster stability or provoke further conflict. Many now prefer a long-term weakening of both Iran and Israel, rather than a decisive victory for either, to reduce threats to their own regimes. Saudi and Emirati strategies of hedging - including outreach to Iran - suggest a desire to avoid taking sides in regional conflicts, reducing their willingness to join an anti-Iran alliance led by Israel. Turkey, too, is unlikely to accept Israeli regional dominance. What was once a "golden age" of cooperation in the 1990s has devolved into mutual suspicion. Turkish leaders have grown increasingly vocal in their condemnation of Israel's actions, particularly in Gaza, and Ankara views Israel's deepening alliances with Greece and Cyprus as a threat. Turkey continues to build its own military and missile capabilities and asserts regional influence in Syria. It also positions itself as a potential mediator in Israeli-Iranian tensions - an indication of its desire to act independently. A fragile vision Trump's military campaign may have weakened Iran's nuclear ambitions and its regional allies, but long-term regional stability remains elusive. The current "peace" is more accurately described as a fragile truce than a durable shift. At its core, Israeli military superiority has failed to deliver political solutions. Without addressing the Palestinian question, stabilising Gaza, and navigating complex regional rivalries, lasting peace is impossible. Even if armed groups are temporarily subdued, the region's capacity to generate new forms of resistance endures Even if armed resistance groups such as Hezbollah or Hamas are temporarily subdued, the region's capacity to generate new forms of resistance endures. Israel may maintain its military edge, but it will continue to struggle for legitimacy and leadership in the Middle East. As violations of international law by the US and Israel mount, the message appears clear: "Only the weak follow the rules." Such a precedent erodes collective security and undermines any meaningful regional consensus. Real, enduring peace will not come through dominance alone - it demands diplomacy, justice, and the courage to confront the root causes of conflict. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Filipino Times
2 hours ago
- Filipino Times
Majority of Filipinos support impeachment trial for VP Sara Duterte — OCTA
Majority of Filipinos believe that Vice President Sara Duterte should face an impeachment trial, according to the July 2025 Tugon ng Masa (TNM) survey conducted by OCTA Research. The survey shows that 80% of respondents agreed that Duterte should stand trial to respond to the allegations against her. Fourteen percent disagreed, while 7% were either undecided or declined to answer. Support for the trial was recorded across all regions: 87% in the National Capital Region, 77% in Balance Luzon, 92% in the Visayas, and 69% in Mindanao. High support was also consistent across socio-economic classes, with 80% from Classes A to D, and 78% from Class E. Among those who supported the impeachment trial, 59% said Duterte should answer the charges, clear her name, and prove she deserves to stay in office. Twenty-one percent said they believed in the charges, while 16% said undergoing trial is necessary if she plans to run in the 2028 elections. Of those who opposed the trial, 44% said it was a political conflict between Duterte and President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., 33% said they believed in her integrity and rejected the accusations, and 19% said she should focus on public service instead. The survey was conducted from July 12 to 17, 2025, through face-to-face interviews with 1,200 Filipino adults aged 18 and above. The results were released a week after the Supreme Court declared the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte unconstitutional. The decision stemmed from a petition filed by Duterte and lawyer Israelito Torreon, among others. Supreme Court spokesperson Camille Ting clarified that the ruling does not absolve Duterte of the charges, and that a new impeachment complaint may be filed starting February 6, 2026. Three impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte in December 2024, all linked to the alleged misuse of confidential funds. A fourth complaint, endorsed by more than one-third of House lawmakers, was transmitted to the Senate. Duterte has denied the allegations and pleaded 'not guilty,' calling the impeachment complaint a mere 'scrap of paper.'
