PUTAHE NI DAYUNYOR
12 September 2024
𝙋𝙃𝙄𝙇𝙄𝙋𝙋𝙄𝙉𝙀 𝙁𝙊𝙍𝙀𝙄𝙂𝙉 𝙋𝙊𝙇𝙄𝘾𝙔 𝘿𝙄𝙇𝙀𝙈𝙈𝘼: 𝙃𝙊𝙒 𝙏𝙊 𝙏𝘼𝙆𝙀 𝙏𝙃𝙀 𝙋𝙃𝙄𝙇𝙄𝙋𝙋𝙄𝙉𝙀𝙎 𝙊𝙁𝙁 𝙏𝙃𝙀 𝙈𝙀𝙉𝙐
Understanding international relations requires sensitivity to time and an honest assessment of one’s place in its flow. The current decision makers lack them. Time to reverse the situation.
The Bongbong Marcos foreign policy has turned the Philippines into an item on the menu at the table of international system. An unfortunate consequence of reverting into a U.S vassal state from which the Philippines will find it difficult to extricate itself.
The “menu” reference comes from the statement of U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken during the February 2024 Munich Security Conference. He said: “If you're not at the table in the international system, you’re going to be on the menu.” This is a harsh but realistic view of the international system, which is unwittingly (or deliberately being forgotten) by Philippine foreign policy honchos. Realism is harsh, but to ignore its counsel is a fatal folly.
Blinken’s table-menu theory in less poetic terms is simple: If you are NOT at the negotiating table, you are going to be a leverage on that menu.
Philippine history has two illustrative moments where this was the case:
Chief of which is the fact that Filipino revolutionaries were deliberately not allowed to be at the negotiating table of the U.S.-Spain peace treaty (1898 Paris Treaty), which decided the fate of the Philippines.
Then there’s the so-called Scarborough deal between China and the United States in 2012. According to Philippine Ambassador Cuisia, U.S. officials told him that they had reached a deal with China on simultaneous withdrawal. Because of that information, the Aquino administration withdrew from Scarborough Shoal. China stayed and now has effective occupation. The Philippines was never part of that supposed negotiations. The U.S. has not admitted that there was such a deal with China.
How the great nationalist Claro M. Recto described Philippine foreign policy in the 50s still rings true today:
“𝑾𝒆 𝒉𝒂𝒗𝒆 𝒃𝒆𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒆 𝒗𝒊𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒐𝒘𝒏 𝒑𝒓𝒐𝒑𝒂𝒈𝒂𝒏𝒅𝒂 𝒘𝒉𝒊𝒄𝒉 𝒘𝒆 𝒑𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒐𝒖𝒔𝒍𝒚 𝒄𝒂𝒍𝒍 ‘𝒑𝒔𝒚𝒄𝒉𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 𝒘𝒂𝒓𝒇𝒂𝒓𝒆.’ 𝑳𝒊𝒌𝒆 𝒂 𝒔𝒎𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒅𝒐𝒈, 𝒘𝒆 𝒈𝒐 𝒕𝒂𝒈𝒈𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒂𝒍𝒐𝒏𝒈 𝒃𝒆𝒉𝒊𝒏𝒅 𝑼𝒏𝒄𝒍𝒆 𝑺𝒂𝒎 𝒘𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒓 𝒉𝒆 𝒈𝒐𝒆𝒔 𝒊𝒏 𝑨𝒔𝒊𝒂, 𝒃𝒂𝒓𝒌𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒆 𝒂𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑪𝒐𝒎𝒎𝒖𝒏𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒔, 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒕𝒍𝒆, 𝒂𝒍𝒎𝒐𝒔𝒕 𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒖𝒅𝒊𝒃𝒍𝒆, 𝒃𝒂𝒓𝒌. 𝑶𝒇 𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒔𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒆𝒏𝒆𝒎𝒚 𝒌𝒏𝒐𝒘𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 ‘𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒃𝒂𝒓𝒌 𝒊𝒔 𝒘𝒐𝒓𝒔𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒏 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒃𝒊𝒕𝒆’ 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒔𝒐 𝒇𝒂𝒓 𝒘𝒆 𝒉𝒂𝒗𝒆 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒑𝒓𝒐𝒅𝒖𝒄𝒆𝒅 𝒂𝒏𝒚 𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒆𝒙𝒄𝒆𝒑𝒕 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒉𝒂𝒑𝒔 𝒔𝒐𝒎𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒏𝒐𝒚𝒂𝒏𝒄𝒆."
The “assertive transparency” tactic of the Philippines against China in the South China is nothing but psychological warfare. It will surely not make China give up its claim. It is a PR strategy of the U.S. government funded through the Office of Naval Research. Its name is “Project Myoushu,” led by U.S. intelligence officer Raymond Powell. The Philippines is the drama the U.S. needs against China.
The United States need all the leverage it needs against China.Why? Because the U.S. wants to outcompete China, specially within this crucial time range (2022-2032). This can be clearly gleaned from the 2022 Biden-Harris U.S. National Security Strategy. The Philippines is NOTHING but a U.S. pawn in its geopolitical chess game against China. Just like how Ukraine is the pawn of the U.S. against Russia.
This tactic has been put so honestly by U.S. presidential candidate and current U.S. Republican Senator Mitt Romney in a post on X on March 6, 2023: “𝘗𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘯’𝘴 𝘙𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘢 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘊𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘢’𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺. 𝘚𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘜𝘬𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘥𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘳𝘺, 𝘦𝘯𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘥𝘷𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘨𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘧 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘣𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘥.”
Change the characters and you can apply it to the Philippine situation, that tweet would be: 𝘟𝘪’𝘴 𝘊𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘢 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘙𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘢’𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺. 𝘚𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘱𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘥𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘳𝘺, 𝘦𝘯𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘥𝘷𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘨𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘧 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘣𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘥.
However, the Ukraine situation is getting close to its end. Money for Ukraine is running dry. Worse, Ukraine is “outgunned,” “outnumbered,” its military suffering from “low morale” and “desertion” as CNN recently reported on September 8, 2024.
As Ukraine is suffering from this, the United States has been pursuing diplomatic manoeuvres in order to court China. In August 2024, U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan went to Beijing to have a meeting with Chinese Communist Party Politburo Member, Director of the Office of the Foreign Affairs Commission, and Foreign Minister Wang Yi. The meeting, as the United States said, was “was part of ongoing efforts to maintain channels of communication and responsibly manage the relationship between the United States and the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as discussed by President Biden and President Xi at the November 2023 Woodside Summit.”
Today, September 10, 2024: General Wu Yanan, Commander of the PLA Southern Theater Command and the Commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Samuel J. Paparo had a video call. The agenda: Stabilise military ties of U.S. and China, and to prevent misunderstandings between the two militaries.
These U.S. manoeuvres are pointing towards what we call in International Relations a détente, which means a relaxation of tensions and hostilities. Similar moves from European countries toward China has been going on in the past few months.
Why is the United States and European countries doing this? China’s position in the balance-of-power in the world.
Among the current Great Powers in international relations, China is the balance holder. Among all the most important balance-of-power situations right now, China is the balance holder. In Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, Hans Morgenthau explains this position:
“The holder of the balance waits in the middle in watchful detachment to see which scale is likely to sink. Its isolation is 'splendid'; for since its support or lack of support is the decisive factor in the struggle for power, its foreign policy, if cleverly managed, is able to extract the highest price from those whom it supports.”
The power of the balance holder may be expressed in the following ways, Morgenthau continues: First, “it can make its joining one or the other nation or alliance dependent upon certain conditions favorable to the maintenance or restoration of the balance.” Second, "it can make its support for the peace settlement dependent upon similar conditions;” and Third, “it can, finally, in either situation see to it that the objectives of its own national policy, apart from the maintenance of the balance of power, are realized in the process of balancing the power of others.”
In the post-war settlement of Ukraine, China’s role will be decisive. That’s why American and European leaders have been visiting China in the past months and edging this industrial power closer to its scale rather than Russia. In the conflict between Israel and Palestine (which is a proxy between Israel and other Middle Eastern powers), China’s role is once again decisive in its settlement. In the situation in the Korean Peninsula, again, China’s role is decisive, as it is one of the only two powers North Korea listens to well. The collective West cannot afford fighting both China and Russia at the same time. More so afford to fight China because they need access to the 1.4 billion Chinese market and its natural resources (specially critical rare earth minerals).
The above considerations are the reasons why the détente between the collective West and China is underway.
What should the Philippines do then during this period of detente? Here are two objectives:
1. Take this as a window of opportunity to disentangle from the Great Power game. Re-calibrate Philippine foreign policy and based it on its own GEO-ECONOMIC strategy, which means the Philippines should finally let go of being a pawn in the GEO-POLITICAL strategy of the United States.
2. To be off the menu, the Philippines should directly deal with China at a NEGOTIATING table. This means that the Philippines should let go of its colonial era identity of being the “little brown brother” of the United States.
In line of these, the following suggestions crafted by concerned scientists and scholars of the Philippines (of which I am a part) should be seriously pursued:
We are at the cusp of the restructuring of international politics and economy, propelled by the shift of power from the West to the East.
For over 500 years, the world has been shaped by the West, and now it is being re-shaped by the rise of China, who along with different civilizational centers, are advocating for a multipolar world order. These are highly unsettling times, especially since it could lead to violent confrontation between two superpowers with catastrophic consequences we have not seen before in history.
We believe the Philippines cannot just be a passive bystander and a peripheral actor in this structural change. It cannot just be the grass on which elephants fight. For too long, the Philippines has been just the tail of somebody else’ kite. This should no longer be the case.
The Philippines must resist any attempt to create a world order based on hegemony. It must advocate for a world order based on harmony, supported by strong international institutions.
The Philippines must articulate a foreign policy position, informed by its history and aspirational goals.
𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙋𝙝𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙥𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙨 𝙢𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙨𝙪𝙥𝙥𝙤𝙧𝙩 𝙖 𝙈𝙐𝙇𝙏𝙄𝙋𝙊𝙇𝘼𝙍 𝙬𝙤𝙧𝙡𝙙 𝙤𝙧𝙙𝙚𝙧. 𝙄𝙩 𝙢𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙥𝙪𝙧𝙨𝙪𝙚 𝙖 𝙥𝙤𝙡𝙞𝙘𝙮 𝙤𝙛 𝙈𝙐𝙇𝙏𝙄-𝘼𝙇𝙄𝙂𝙉𝙈𝙀𝙉𝙏, 𝙪𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙣𝙚𝙙 𝙗𝙮 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙥𝙧𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙞𝙥𝙡𝙚 𝙤𝙛 𝙈𝙐𝙇𝙏𝙄𝙇𝘼𝙏𝙀𝙍𝘼𝙇𝙄𝙎𝙈.
The Philippines should seriously consider applying for observer status, or full membership when possible, in the following inter-governmental organizations which may play a significant role in this multipolar world order that we all desire: the BRICS, Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, Gulf Cooperation Council, and African Union, among others.
𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙋𝙝𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙥𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙨 𝙞𝙨 𝙖𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙛𝙡𝙪𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙚 𝙤𝙛 𝙒𝙚𝙨𝙩𝙚𝙧𝙣 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙀𝙖𝙨𝙩𝙚𝙧𝙣 𝙘𝙞𝙫𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙯𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙨 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙢𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙥𝙤𝙨𝙞𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙞𝙩𝙨𝙚𝙡𝙛 𝙖𝙨 𝙖 𝙙𝙞𝙥𝙡𝙤𝙢𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙘 𝙗𝙧𝙞𝙙𝙜𝙚 𝙗𝙪𝙞𝙡𝙙𝙚𝙧.
The Philippines must take an active role in supporting peace initiatives. It should be one of the mediators or interlocutors that will put a politico-diplomatic solution to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. It must advocate measures to de-escalate the increasing politico-military tensions in the Taiwan strait.
𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙋𝙝𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙥𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙨 𝙢𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙧𝙚𝙫𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝙞𝙩𝙨 𝙛𝙤𝙧𝙢𝙚𝙧 𝙥𝙤𝙨𝙞𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙜𝙚𝙤-𝙚𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙤𝙢𝙞𝙘 𝙤𝙧𝙙𝙚𝙧 𝙤𝙛 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙬𝙤𝙧𝙡𝙙—𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙣𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝘼𝙨𝙞𝙖 𝙩𝙤 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝘼𝙢𝙚𝙧𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙨.
From the 16th to the 19th centuries, the Philippines, through the galleon trade, played a central role in the trans-Pacific trade, giving birth to a truly globalized economy. This historical role should not just be a relic of the past but must be revived to place the Philippines, once again, as a central actor in the present global economy.
From being at the periphery, the revival of this geo-economic position will restore the Philippines as a pivotal geopolitical actor in the emerging world economic order—a role that we should actively pursue, build, and maintain.
-- Authored by Sass Rogando Sasot
