Forging a New Philippine Foreign Policy
Forging a New Philippine Foreign Policy (FNPFP) features research papers, commentaries, analyses, and updates on different Philippine foreign-policy related news, covering the country's relations with various and regions of the world. A project by the Asian Center, it also publishes a monitor on upcoming, ongoing, or recently concluded researches, publications, and events such as lectures and conferences sponsored by various institutions. FNPFP is also part of a research program, Thematic Assessment of Philippine Foreign Relations, funded by the University of the Philippines Diliman.
In the realm of foreign policy, the Duterte administration has pursued what has been termed by the media as the “pivot to China” policy, i.e. pursuing close relations with Beijing despite overlapping claims in the South China Sea (SCS)—a stark contrast to the frosty bilateral ties under President Aquino. Indeed, shortly after Manila received a favorable ruling from an arbitral tribunal, Duterte made an official state visit to China where he was warmly received and where he forged various economic deals with Beijing.
Some analysts view Duterte’s moves as bandwagoning with China—an observation reinforced when Manila announced its “separation” from the US, which Duterte clarified later as separating from the economic and military policies of Washington in the region. Duterte’s China initiative has raised concerns in some quarters that Manila is pursuing close relations with Beijing at the expense of its allies and partners. As former top diplomat Albert del Rosario candidly argued: “a close alliance, or valued partners and friends, are suddenly cast aside to favor another state.”
Is the Duterte administration really joining China’s bandwagon? Is the new Philippine government casting aside its treaty ally and partners in favor of China?
- Details
Nevertheless, Duterte appears to have a coherent foreign policy in one key issue: Philippine-China relations. Although wide-ranging, ties between the two countries have been consumed by the South China Sea (SCS) issue. Days after Duterte’s inauguration, a decision in the Philippines v China case went largely in Manila’s favor. But in stark departure from his predecessor’s approach, the new government’s policy towards Beijing has been largely clear: to repair—and eventually promote a stable—relationship with China through strategic engagement. Thus far, it appears that this policy has three key components.
TWENTY years have passed since the Southeast Asian Nuclear Weapons-Free Zone Treaty (SEA-NWFZT) was signed, on Dec. 15, 1995 in Bangkok by all the ten members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations or ASEAN. Designated as the "Bangkok Treaty", the Southeast Asian Nuclear Weapons-Free Zone Treaty was entered into force (EIF) on March 28, 1997.
The first Nuclear Weapons Free Zone Treaty after the Cold War, the Bangkok Treaty is considered a model for regional de-nuclearization. According to Dr. Hiro Umebayashi, Director of the Research Center for Nuclear Weapons Abolition of Nagasaki University, this is because "it applies not just to territories but includes in its coverage Exclusive Economic Zones and Continental Shelves." It also prohibits the dumping or discharge of radioactive material or nuclear waste in its area of coverage. This is why, predictably, even today, all the five Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) which include Russia, the U.S., China, U.K. and France refuse to sign its Protocols. But are the states of Southeast Asia, genuine Nuclear Weapons-Free states today?
The question on whether we actually understand policy pronouncements of President Rodrigo Duterte came about when I had a conversation with a member of the US Special Operations Forces. He is assigned here in Manila and leads a team of Special Forces who train soldiers of the Philippine Army. In the light of foreign policy debacle arising from a succession of anti-American statements by the Philippine President, the counterpart asked, ”Do you think that because he is from Mindanao, he can’t clearly explain himself?” As some of us continue to glue our eyes and ears on the television for yet another Duterte “blunder”, I came to wonder, What does the President want? Do we really understand the context of what he is saying? How do we make sense of it all?
In Philippine politics, as in other countries, a change of administration can result in various alterations of policy. Given the upcoming 2016 Philippine national elections, a change in the leadership has the potential to influence the way the Philippines pursues its Sabah claim. Candidates wishing to differentiate themselves from the administration have released statements that they deem to be contrary to the ruling coalition’s policies, which now define the official position of the country towards the Sabah claim. While systemic constraints such as allocation of resources, balance of power, geography, etc. all contribute to foreign policy decisions, the role of individuals, more specifically elected officials, should also be considered. This position is best supported by Daniel L. Byman and Kenneth M. Pollack in their work entitled, “Let Us Now Praise Great Men: Bringing the Statesmen Back In,” wherein they were able to describe Hitler’s influence in Germany’s conduct during the Second World War [1] as opposed to the perception that such could purely be understood by analyzing at the systemic level.