The Philippines-US Relationship Is Tested as President Marcos Visits Washington
Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is currently on a three-day visit to Washington D.C., which began with his arrival on July 20. The trip comes during a time of churn in the U.S. relationship with the Philippines, as with other Southeast Asian states. U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff policies have caused much concern in Manila, even as the Philippines, with China on its mind, continues to deepen its security cooperation with United States.
A sound, long-term relationship between these two allies will be difficult to maintain unless the alliance gets its security and economic mix right. This week's meetings are critical for the two sides to close their gap.
The slew of tariffs unleashed by the Trump administration against its allies and partners did not spare the Philippines. In fact, the initial tariff of 17 percent announced in April was recently raised to 20 percent. Manila is more than concerned, especially as its fellow ASEAN states Indonesia and Vietnam succeeded in lowering their initial tariffs significantly (albeit to similar levels as the Philippines – 19 percent and 20 percent, respectively) in deals with Washington. Meanwhile the Luzon Economic Corridor, a major U.S.-backed project of new investments in connectivity and infrastructure in the Philippines, has made little progress despite being announced more than a year ago.
Soon after being elected, Marcos made a major U-turn in Philippine foreign policy, turning away from his predecessor Rodrigo Duterte's antipathy toward the United States. Manila is justifiably mystified as to why it should face the same tariff wrath as its non-aligned ASEAN neighbors, when it has done much more to align with U.S. strategies to counter China.
Meanwhile, China's expansive claims in the South China Sea (ruled illegal in 2016 by an international tribunal) and coercive maritime behavior remain a challenge for the alliance. China's intrusive behavior has seen a sharp uptick since late 2023, and has continued essentially unabated this year.
Moreover, Marcos himself is politically weaker today than he was a year ago after his fallout with the powerful Duterte dynasty and setbacks in the recent mid-term elections. The return of the Dutertes is a distinct possibility in the 2028 election, with the former president's daughter and current Vice President Sara Duterte, topping early polls. An economic win will help bolster Marcus politically at home and help improve the prospects for a more U.S.-friendly successor in 2028.
The Trump administration correctly aims to shift some of the burden of mutual defense to its Asian allies, including the Philippines, to save money and keep direct exposure of U.S. troops at a lower level in the South China Sea. This implies greater defense spending by Manila, but also more U.S. support for Philippine capabilities to counter Chinese gray zone tactics in the South China Sea.
Some of this is indeed happening – including help for Philippine base upgrades and projects such as the recently announced boat repair facility in Palawan, located near the flashpoint of Second Thomas Shoal.
However, some U.S. actions are escalatory. The most dangerous development is the alliance creep toward the Taiwan theater. New U.S. military sites have mostly been located close to the Bashi Channel that separates the main Philippine island of Luzon from Taiwan, and far from the South China Sea. Washington has also deployed major war-fighting missile systems to Luzon that can strike at targets deep in the Chinese mainland.
Countering China's gray zone tactics in the escalatory war-fighting plane, and especially as part of a plan for a Taiwan contingency, is a bad idea. As a recent Quincy Institute Brief argued, defending, not provoking, ought to be the guiding principle for Washington.
Dropping the ball on the bilateral economic relationship only makes matters worse.
An ideal policy mix would involve strong U.S. support for enhancing Manila's capacities to counter Chinese tactics in the South China Sea, a high degree of caution on any Philippine involvement in a Taiwan conflict, and energizing, rather than damaging, trade and investment ties between the two allies.
Thus, the United States should continue to support the Philippines diplomatically and aim to bolster its maritime capacities and maritime domain awareness. It should also actualize economic initiatives such as the Luzon Economic Corridor as soon as possible. A strategy of non-escalatory balancing by mainly strengthening Philippine capacities in all dimensions is far safer than accelerating bloc formation and expanding U.S. military deployments. A focus along these lines in this week's meetings could strengthen the alliance for the long haul.
Ultimately the rise of economically capable and autonomous middle powers in Asia is the surest way to both reduce a frontal U.S. military role and achieve a stable and sustainable region. Such a nuanced strategy can help check Beijing's worst tendencies – but also limit risk-taking by Washington and other Asian states. The Philippines-U.S. alliance could be an exemplar of this approach if both allies want it to be so.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Mainichi
a few seconds ago
- The Mainichi
State Department may require visa applicants to post bond of up to $15,000 to enter the US
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The State Department is proposing requiring applicants for business and tourist visas to post a bond of up to $15,000 to enter the United States, a move that may make the process unaffordable for many. In a notice to be published in the Federal Register on Tuesday, the department said it would start a 12-month pilot program under which people from countries deemed to have high overstay rates and deficient internal document security controls could be required to post bonds of $5,000, $10,000 or $15,000 when they apply for a visa. The proposal comes as the Trump administration is tightening requirements for visa applicants. Last week, the State Department announced that many visa renewal applicants would have to submit to an additional in-person interview, something that was not required in the past. In addition, the department is proposing that applicants for the Visa Diversity Lottery program have valid passports from their country of citizenship. A preview of the bond notice, which was posted on the Federal Register website on Monday, said the pilot program would take effect within 15 days of its formal publication and is necessary to ensure that the U.S. government is not financially liable if a visitor does not comply with the terms of his or her visa. "Aliens applying for visas as temporary visitors for business or pleasure and who are nationals of countries identified by the department as having high visa overstay rates, where screening and vetting information is deemed deficient, or offering citizenship by investment, if the alien obtained citizenship with no residency requirement, may be subject to the pilot program," the notice said. The countries affected will be listed once the program takes effect, it said. The bond could be waived depending on an applicant's individual circumstances. The bond would not apply to citizens of countries enrolled in the Visa Waiver Program, which enables travel for business or tourism for up to 90 days. The majority of the 42 countries enrolled in the program are in Europe, with others in Asia, the Middle East and elsewhere. Visa bonds have been proposed in the past but have not been implemented. The State Department has traditionally discouraged the requirement because of the cumbersome process of posting and discharging a bond and because of a possible misperceptions by the public. However, the department said that previous view "is not supported by any recent examples or evidence, as visa bonds have not generally been required in any recent period."
The Mainichi
a few seconds ago
- The Mainichi
Brazil's Supreme Court orders house arrest for former President Jair Bolsonaro
SAO PAULO (AP) -- Brazil's Supreme Court on Monday ordered the house arrest for the country's former President Jair Bolsonaro, on trial for allegedly masterminding a coup plot to remain in office despite his defeat in the 2022 election -- a case that has gripped the South American country as it faces a trade war with the Trump administration. Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who oversees the case against Bolsonaro before the top court, said in his decision that the 70-year-old former president had violated precautionary measures imposed on him by posting content on the social media channels of his three lawmaker sons. On Sunday, Bolsonaro addressed supporters in Rio de Janeiro through the phone of one of his sons, Sen. Flavio Bolsonaro. The trial of the far-right leader is receiving renewed attention after U.S. President Donald Trump directly tied a 50% tariff on imported Brazilian goods to the judicial situation of Jair Bolsonaro, a Trump ally. Trump has called the proceedings a " witch hunt," triggering nationalist reactions from leaders of all branches of power in Brazil, including President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Following news of the arrest order, a staffer with Brazil's federal police told The Associated Press that federal agents were currently at Bolsonaro's residence in the capital of Brasilia to seize cell phones, as ordered by de Moraes in his decision. The staffer spoke on condition of anonymity due to their lack of authorization to speak about the matter publicly. Bolsonaro is expected to remain in Brasilia for his house arrest as he is not allowed to travel. He also has a house in Rio de Janeiro, where he held his electoral base as a lawmaker for three decades. Brazil's prosecutors accuse Bolsonaro of heading a criminal organization that plotted to overturn the election, including plans to kill Lula and Justice de Moraes after the far-right leader narrowly lost his reelection bid in 2022. Monday's order followed one from the top court last month that ordered Bolsonaro wear an electronic ankle monitor and imposed a curfew on his activities while the proceedings are underway. De Moraes added in his ruling that Bolsonaro, who governed Brazil between 2019 and 2022, has spread messages with "a clear content of encouragement and instigation to attacks against the Supreme Court and a blatant support for foreign intervention in the Brazilian Judiciary." Last week, the U.S. Treasury Department announced sanctions on de Moraes over alleged suppression of freedom of expression and the ongoing trial of Bolsonaro. The move from the Brazilian justice comes a day after tens of thousands of Bolsonaro supporters took the streets in the cities of Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, pleading for Brazil's congress to pardon him and hundreds of others who are under trial for their roles in the destruction of government buildings in Brasilia on Jan. 8, 2023. De Moraes also said in his ruling that Bolsonaro "addressed protesters gathered in Copacabana, in Rio de Janeiro" on Sunday so his supporters could "try to coerce the Supreme Court." The latest decision from the top court keeps Boslonaro under ankle monitoring, allows only family members and lawyers to visit him and seizes all mobile phones from his home.
The Mainichi
a few seconds ago
- The Mainichi
Modi and Trump once called each other good friends. Now the US-India relationship is getting bumpy
NEW DELHI (AP) -- The men shared bear hugs, showered praise on each other and made appearances side by side at stadium rallies -- a big optics boost for two populist leaders with ideological similarities. Each called the other a good friend. In India, the bonhomie between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and U.S. President Donald Trump was seen as a relationship like no other. That is, until a series of events gummed up the works. From Trump's tariffs and India's purchase of oil from Russia to a U.S. tilt towards Pakistan, friction between New Delhi and Washington has been hard to miss. And much of it has happened far from the corridors of power and, unsurprisingly, through Trump's posts on social media. It has left policy experts wondering whether the camaraderie the two leaders shared may be a thing of the past, even though Trump has stopped short of referring to Modi directly on social media. The dip in rapport, some say, puts a strategic bilateral relationship built over decades at risk. "This is a testing time for the relationship," said Ashok Malik, a former policy adviser in India's Foreign Ministry. The White House did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment. Simmering tensions over trade and tariffs The latest hiccup between India and the U.S. emerged last week when Trump announced that he was slapping 25% tariffs on India as well as an unspecified penalty because of India's purchasing of Russian oil. For New Delhi, such a move from its largest trading partner is expected to be felt across sectors, but it also led to a sense of unease in India -- even more so when Trump, on social media, called India's economy "dead." Trump's recent statements reflect his frustration with the pace of trade talks with India, according to a White House official who was not authorized to speak publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity to describe internal administration thinking. The Republican president has not been pursuing any strategic realignment with Pakistan, according to the official, but is instead trying to play hardball in negotiations. Trump doubled down on the pressure Monday with a fresh post on Truth Social, in which he accused India of buying "massive amounts" of oil from Russia and then "selling it on the Open Market for big profits." "They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine. Because of this, I will be substantially raising the Tariff paid by India to the USA," he said. The messaging appears to have stung Modi's administration, which has been hard-selling negotiations with Trump's team over a trade deal by balancing between India's protectionist system while also opening up the country's market to more American goods. Many expected India to react strongly considering Modi's carefully crafted reputation of strength. Instead, the announcement prompted a rather careful response from India's commerce minister, Piyush Goyal, who said the two countries are working towards a "fair, balanced and mutually beneficial bilateral trade agreement." India's Foreign Ministry also played down suggestions of any strain. However, experts in New Delhi wonder. "Strenuous, uninterrupted and bipartisan efforts in both capitals over the past 25 years are being put at risk by not just the tariffs but by fast and loose statements and social media posts," said Malik, who now heads the India chapter of The Asia Group, a U.S. advisory firm . Malik also said the trade deal the Indian side has offered to the U.S. is the "most expansive in this country's history," referring to reports that India was willing to open up to some American agricultural products. That is a politically sensitive issue for Modi, who faced a yearlong farmers' protest a few years ago. Trump appears to be tilting towards Pakistan The unraveling may have gained momentum over tariffs, but the tensions have been palpable for a while. Much of it has to do with Trump growing closer to Pakistan, India's nuclear rival in the neighborhood. In May, India and Pakistan traded a series of military strikes over a gun massacre in disputed Kashmir that New Delhi blamed Islamabad for. Pakistan denied the accusations. The four-day conflict made the possibility of a nuclear conflagration between the two sides seem real and the fighting only stopped when global powers intervened. But it was Trump's claims of mediation and an offer to work to provide a "solution" regarding the dispute over Kashmir that made Modi's administration uneasy. Since then, Trump has repeated nearly two dozen times that he brokered peace between India and Pakistan. For Modi, that is a risky -- even nervy -- territory. Domestically, he has positioned himself as a leader who is tough on Pakistan. Internationally, he has made huge diplomatic efforts to isolate the country. So Trump's claims cut a deep wound, prompting a sense in India that the U.S. may no longer be its strategic partner. India insists that Kashmir is India's internal issue and had opposed any third-party intervention. Last week Modi appeared to dismiss Trump's claims after India's Opposition began demanding answers from him. Modi said that "no country in the world stopped" the fighting between India and Pakistan, but he did not name Trump. Trump has also appeared to be warming up to Pakistan, even praising its counterterrorism efforts. Hours after levying tariffs on India, Trump announced a "massive" oil exploration deal with Pakistan, saying that some day, India might have to buy oil from Islamabad. Earlier, he also hosted one of Pakistan's top military officials at a private lunch. Sreeram Sundar Chaulia, an expert at New Delhi's Jindal School of International Affairs, said Trump's sudden admiration for Pakistan as a great partner in counterterrorism has "definitely soured" the mood in India. Chaulia said "the best-case scenario is that this is just a passing Trump whim," but he also warned that "if financial and energy deals are indeed being struck between the U.S. and Pakistan, it will dent the U.S.-India strategic partnership and lead to loss of confidence in the U.S. in Indian eyes." India's oil purchases from Russia are an irritant The strain in relations has also to do with oil. India had faced strong pressure from the Biden administration to cut back its oil purchases from Moscow during the early months of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Instead, India bought more, making it the second-biggest buyer of Russian oil after China. That pressure sputtered over time and the U.S. focused more on building strategic ties with India, which is seen as a bulwark against a rising China. Trump's threat to penalize India over oil, however, brought back those issues. On Sunday, the Trump administration made its frustrations over ties between India and Russia ever more public. Stephen Miller, deputy chief of staff at the White House, accused India of financing Russia's war in Ukraine by purchasing oil from Moscow, saying it was "not acceptable." Some experts, though, suspect Trump's remarks are mere pressure tactics. "Given the wild fluctuations in Trump's policies," Chaulia said, "it may return to high fives and hugs again."
