Alyanna Angelina M.

Cabral PS 180

2012-65902 Prof. Bobby Tuazon

2016 Presidentiables on Philippine Foreign Policy

President Benigno Aquino III’s foreign policy is highly influenced by the competition
between US and China towards being the world superpower. The direction of the current
administration’s foreign policy can be seen in how it deals with the West Philippine Sea dispute
with China. It is said that the current administration is in favor of resolving this issue through UN
arbitration while China opposes this multilateral intervention. Here, Philippines is put in a tight
spot. It cannot assert its claim through multilateral talks because China is unwilling to participate
and at the same time, it cannot assert its claim through war because Philippines is no match for
China in terms of military power. Thus, in order to resolve this dispute, the only option left for
Philippines are to rely on US’s military power or to bilaterally negotiate with China

Recently, Philippine and American officials signed the Enhanced Defense Cooperation
Agreement (EDCA), which allows US to install bases and conduct military operations in the
Philippines. Moreover, EDCA is seen as a deterrent to China’s increasing assertiveness regarding
the said dispute. Therefore, the current Philippine foreign policy is clearly leaning towards the
interest of US rather than China. This is expected given the Philippines’s foreign policy for the
past administrations.

In turn, former Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) Secretary Mar
Roxas, being the standard bearer of the incumbent party, is expected to continue President
Aquino’s foreign policy if ever he won the presidency this coming 2016 elections.1 During his
visit in Masinloc, Zambales, he said, “What’s for the Philippines should remain in the hands of
Filipinos. We will defend what is ours.” This indicates that Roxas is in favor of Philippines
continuing to assert its right in the West Philippine Sea and not doing any compromise with
China.2 Indeed, Roxas’s strong stance against China confirms that he is more on US’s side.

Unlike Roxas, it seems that Vice President Jejomar Binay will adapt a softer and more
accommodating foreign policy towards China. Instead of being hostile towards China for its
construction of military bases and reclamation in the Kalayaan Group of Islands, Binay suggests
that the Philippines take advantage of China’s economic power and improve trade relations with
China through a joint venture. According to him, since China has the money, it would be
advantageous for the Philippines to negotiate with China, allow them access to natural resources
in the said area and together with China, develop these resources.3 He also added that this
bilateral joint venture is the only alternative in resolving the West Philippine Sea dispute since
China opposes multilateralism.4

However, the joint venture suggested by Binay is unconstitutional according to Senior

Associate Justice Antonio Carpio. The Kalayaan Group of Islands is under the Philippine
territory according to the Baselines Law (RA No. 3046), thus a joint venture with China in the
said area violates Section 2, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution which mandates that the
nation’s marine wealth in its Exclusive Economic Zone be reserved for the use and enjoyment of
Filipino citizens.5 If ever Binay won the presidency in 2016, it is likely that as president, Binay
would find a way to serve the interests of China and actualize this joint venture despite its
unconstitutionality, just like what happened in EDCA.

Like Binay, Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte is also in favor of resolving the West
Philippine Sea dispute through a joint venture with China, however this time, also with other
claimant countries.6 Aside from recognizing the economic benefits of having a joint venture with
China, Duterte also recognizes its great military power. He once said that he would not want to
go to war with China because Philippines’s military forces and equipment are not strong enough
to solely face China in a war.7 Therefore, simultaneous with shifting the foreign policy vis-à-vis
China, Duterte suggests that a credible self-defense force of the Philippines be developed.6 Thus,
with the plan of strengthening or modernizing Philippines’s military forces, it can be said that
Duterte’s foreign policy is directed towards the elimination of the perceived Philippine reliance
on US military power.

Unlike the previous presidential candidates mentioned, Senator Grace Poe-Llamanzares’s

position on foreign policy is not leaning towards any of the two world superpowers. For one, she
recognizes that US interests are different from Philippine interests. She once stated that
Philippines cannot rely on US to defend them against China. This is because it is not likely for
US to sacrifice its relationship with China for Philippines’s sake. Moreover, she said that US
cannot be blamed for acting based on its own interests. However, she also asserts that Philippines
should also act based on its own interests,8 which are different from those of the US. On the
other hand, Poe also suggests that the West Philippine dispute be resolved multilaterally by
continuing with the UN arbitration case against China.9 However, she noted that this
multilateralism is not to severe Philippine ties with China. According to her, aside from the West
Philippine Sea dispute, there are other aspects of Sino-Philippine relations such as economy,
business, and tourism, and it is important to develop a good relationship with China in these
aspects.8

Given the heated issue of West Philippine Sea dispute today, foreign policy is indeed an
important factor in determining who will succeed President Aquino in his presidency. It is
expected that US will root for Roxas in this presidential race since there would be not much
obstacles in advancing their interests under his administration.

On the other hand, given Binay’s openness to a joint venture with China, US will have to
do some persuasion in order to gain the full loyalty of Binay. This may give way to more
inequitable trade agreements between Philippines and US, inequitable in a sense that it will only
benefit the upper 1% of the society, and thus will be beneficial to Binay’s economic foundation
of power.
 Meanwhile, Duterte seems to focus more on the military aspect of foreign policy. He may
seem to be open towards the existence of US military forces and bases in the Philippines. But
this is not because of wanting to serve the interests of US. Instead, it is to take advantage of US’s
forces and bases so that Philippines can develop its own military power. However, more
important than strengthening Philippines’s military force is the development of a stable and self-
dependent economy.

As for Poe, aside from her expression of independence regarding foreign policy, it seems
that Poe is trying to be as neutral as possible in her position. Her position shows a foreign policy
that does not merely adhere to the interests of both China and US. At the same time, she also
does not express condemnation towards any of the two world superpowers. This neutrality
indicates that adhering to any sides between China and US is not a priority of Poe. This sense of
neutralism is an important aspect of an independent foreign policy because it allows the president
to focus on the distinct interests of the Filipino people.

_______________________________
1
Ordaniel, J. (2015, May 28). The geopolitical stakes of the 2016 Philippine elections. The
Diplomat. Retrieved from http://thediplomat.com/2015/05/the-geopolitical-stakes-of-the-2016-
philippine-elections/
2
Cupin, B. (2015, July 31). The leader I want: Mar roxas’ to-fix list for 2016. Rappler. Retrieved
from http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/101081-mar-roxas-leader-i-want
3
Carleon, R. E. J. (2015, April 18). Binay policy could soften PH stance against China. Kicker
Daily. Retrieved from http://kickerdaily.com/binay-policy-could-soften-ph-stance-against-china/
4
Rodis, R. (2015, April 24). Is Binay the manchurian candidate?. Inquirer.net. Retrieved
from http://globalnation.inquirer.net/121246/is-binay-the-manchurian-candidate
5
Tordessilas, E. (2015, April 30). Binay warned on joint development with China in Spratlys
[Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.ellentordesillas.com/2015/04/30/binay-warned-on-joint-
development-with-china-in-spratlys/
6
Rappler.com. (2015, April 23). Duterte: Revive ROTC amid China’s build-up in West PH
Sea. Rappler. Retrieved from http://www.rappler.com/nation/90877-duterte-rotc-china-build-up-
west-ph-sea
7
Inquirer.net. (2015, April 21). Duterte warns China: Buildup to prompt US bases’ return in PH.
Inquirer.net. Retrieved from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/686909/duterte-warns-china-buildup-to-
prompt-us-bases-return-in-ph
8
Fonbuena, C. (2015, June 11). Poe on West PH Sea row: PH shouldn't rely on US. Rappler.
Retrieved from http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/96051-grace-poe-policy-
south-china-sea
9
The Philippine Pride. (2015, July 31). Grace Poe says no to US military support to PH over
Spratly dispute. The Philippine Pride. Retrieved from http://www.thephilippinepride.com/grace-
poe-says-no-to-us-military-in-ph/