Introduction
The Philippines, in partnership with the United States, recently conducted a joint air patrol aimed at safeguarding territorial boundaries and national interests. This action was prompted by accusations from Beijing, which criticized Manila for allegedly exacerbating tensions by engaging in exercises with “extraterritorial countries.” The Philippine military emphasized that the joint patrol aimed to enhance interoperability between armed forces and bolster the capabilities of its air force in protecting territorial integrity, sovereign rights, and national interests. China’s Southern Theater Command closely monitored the drills. The South China Sea, a crucial shipping route, remains a focal point of contention. Philippine-China relations have strained, particularly as Manila strengthens its defense ties with the United States. President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s administration has sought to expand cooperation with the U.S., signaling a departure from previous efforts to improve relations with Beijing. Looking ahead, the Philippines anticipates further joint maritime activities with its allies. This scenario prompts a question: How far can the Philippines realistically defend its sovereign rights and interests amid China’s growing assertiveness? Let us delve into details to answer this question.
Key Factors Determining Defense Capability
Military Strength
The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), comprising the Philippine Army, Navy, and Air Force, serves as the military branch of the Philippine government. Currently, the AFP boasts an active personnel strength of approximately 140,000, supplemented by a reserve force of around 400,000. The nation faces diverse security challenges, including territorial disputes in the South China Sea, internal conflicts involving communist and Islamist rebels, and the ever-present threat of natural disasters. To effectively address these multifaceted challenges, the AFP initiated a 15-year modernization program in 2012, slated for completion in 2027. The overarching goal of this program is to bolster the AFP’s capabilities in fulfilling its constitutional mandate of safeguarding the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Philippines.
Structured into three distinct phases or horizons, the modernization program has made significant strides. The first horizon, spanning from 2013 to 2018, prioritized the acquisition of fundamental equipment, such as transport aircraft, helicopters, patrol vessels, and rifles. Subsequently, the second horizon (2018-2022) focused on enhancing joint and interoperable capabilities, encompassing acquisitions like fighter jets, frigates, radars, and missile systems. The ongoing third horizon (2023-2027) aspires to establish a credible and deterrent defense posture, involving acquisitions like submarines, multirole fighters, and long-range missiles.
Key highlights of the modernization program include the procurement of 12 FA-50PH light combat aircraft from South Korea, marking the Philippine Air Force’s reentry into the arena of supersonic jets. The Philippine Navy acquired two Jose Rizal-class frigates from South Korea, signifying the introduction of missile-capable warships. The AFP also acquired six ScanEagle unmanned aerial vehicles from the United States for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions. Furthermore, two BrahMos missile batteries from India now equip the Philippine Army, serving as the first supersonic and precision-strike weapons in its arsenal. Additionally, the acquisition of three C-130J-30 Super Hercules tactical airlifters from the United States enhances the AFP’s capabilities for humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations.
The modernization program, supported by a total budget of approximately US$15 billion, is financed through a combination of national government funds, foreign loans, and grants. While the initiative has encountered challenges such as budget constraints, procurement delays, and legal issues, the Philippine government remains steadfast in its commitment to complete the program, particularly in light of recent tensions with China in the South China Sea. Anticipated outcomes of the AFP’s modernization efforts include heightened defense capability, improved readiness, and enhanced professionalism. These developments are expected not only to fortify national security but also to contribute to regional stability and security.
Economic and Technological Resources
The economic capacity and technological resources of the Philippines play pivotal roles in sustaining defense efforts and achieving self-reliance, key components of national security. Notably, in 2021, the Philippines allocated approximately 1.04% of its GDP, equivalent to $4.09 billion, for military expenditure, marking one of the lowest percentages among Southeast Asian nations and falling below the global average of 2.2%.
A significant aspect of the Philippines’ defense landscape is the ongoing 15-year modernization program for the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), initiated in 2012 and set to continue until 2027. The program, with a total budget of around $15 billion, is funded through a combination of national government resources, foreign loans, and grants. In terms of international support, the Philippines annually receives approximately $40 million in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) from the United States, earmarked for the acquisition of defense articles and services. Additional U.S. security assistance programs, such as the International Military Education and Training (IMET) and the Maritime Security Initiative (MSI), further contribute to the Philippines’ defense capabilities.
As one of the top importers of defense equipment in Southeast Asia, the Philippines spent $338 million in 2021, relying on key sources such as the United States, South Korea, Israel, and Japan for defense imports. The country’s domestic defense industry is limited, primarily focusing on the production of small arms, ammunition, and personal protective equipment. Armscor Global Defense Inc. stands out as one of the largest manufacturers of firearms and ammunition in the Philippines and Southeast Asia, exporting its products to over 60 countries.
The Philippine Defense Industry Development Act (PDIDA) is designed to incentivize and support local defense enterprises, while Project COBRA, a joint venture between the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) and the Philippine Army, aims to develop controller-operated battle-ready armaments. Additionally, the Self-Reliant Defense Posture (SRDP) program seeks to revitalize the defense industrial base, reducing dependence on foreign sources.
Geopolitical Alliances and Partnerships
 The United States-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT), a foundational military alliance signed on August 30, 1951, in Washington, D.C., binds both nations to provide mutual support in the event of an armed attack in the Pacific Area. Serving as the linchpin of the Philippine-U.S. alliance, the MDT is complemented by the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), affording the U.S. access to Philippine military bases and facilities.
Expanding its regional engagements, the Philippines has cultivated alliances with other nations, notably Japan and Australia, as well as active participation in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Strengthening its strategic partnership with Japan, the Philippines has focused on areas such as maritime security, defense equipment and technology, and economic cooperation. Additionally, a Status of Visiting Forces Agreement (SOVFA) with Australia facilitates joint military exercises and training.
However, these alliances face challenges, particularly in the context of diplomatic tensions and domestic politics. The South China Sea dispute with China, which claims vast territories overlapping with Philippine and ASEAN claims, remains a significant source of strain. Despite pursuing international legal avenues, such as the 2016 arbitral ruling invalidating China’s claims, the Philippines has adopted a dual-track approach, engaging in dialogue and cooperation with China on various fronts.
Tensions also exist within the Philippines’ alliance with the United States, its oldest and most crucial ally. While the U.S. reaffirms its commitment to the MDT and the defense of the Philippines, its rivalry with China introduces complexities. The U.S. has urged the Philippines to enhance its defense capabilities and contributions, expressing concerns over domestic policies like the war on drugs and human rights issues.
Domestic politics further shapes Philippine alliances, as diverse political actors and interests hold varying views on foreign policy.
National Will and Public Opinion
Public sentiment towards the military and national defense holds paramount importance in securing the Philippines’ sovereignty, especially in the case of the ongoing South China Sea dispute with China. A June 2021 survey conducted by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) revealed that a substantial 87% of Filipinos believe the government should assert its rights in the West Philippine Sea, adhering to the 2016 arbitral ruling that nullified China’s claims. However, only 49% expressed satisfaction, and 28% registered dissatisfaction.
President Rodrigo Duterte’s administration pursued a conciliatory and pragmatic approach towards China, emphasizing improved bilateral relations across trade, investment, infrastructure, and pandemic response, while downplaying territorial and maritime concerns. This stance faced criticism from opposition groups, civil society organizations, former government officials, and retired military officers who accused the government of being too lenient or inconsistent in safeguarding the country’s rights.
Despite divergent opinions and strategies, the Philippines draws upon a rich history of resilience and resistance against external threats. Historical examples include the successful Philippine Revolution (1896-1898) against Spanish colonial rule, the Philippine-American War (1899-1902) continuing the fight for independence against the United States, the Philippine Commonwealth (1935-1946) as a transitional government towards independence, the Philippine Resistance Movement (1942-1945) resisting Japanese occupation during World War II, the People Power Revolution (1986) toppling the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos, and the EDSA II and EDSA III Protests (2001) leading to the ouster of President Joseph Estrada. The nation’s history of resilience stands as a witness to its eternal spirit in the face of challenges.
Potential Scenarios and Challenges
Escalation of Existing Disputes
In the South China Sea, the Spratly Islands and Scarborough Shoal emerge as focal points of contention among claimant nations, notably China, the Philippines, and Vietnam. Overlapping territorial and maritime claims have ignited tensions, with China exhibiting assertiveness through the deployment of over two hundred Coast Guard and maritime militia vessels near the Spratly Islands and Scarborough Shoal since March 2021. This move showcases China’s persistent presence and exertion of pressure on Philippine forces and fisherfolk, as documented by the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative.
For instance, On January 4, 2022, a U.S. Navy destroyer conducted a freedom of navigation operation near the Mischief Reef, a Chinese-occupied feature in the Spratly Islands. China swiftly condemned the operation as provocative, asserting threats to its security and stability.
In November 2023, a Chinese Coast Guard vessel maneuvered beside the Philippine coast guard ship BRP Sierra Madre as they approached Second Thomas Shoal, locally known as Ayungin Shoal, during a resupply mission. The incident was one of several confrontations that occurred near the shoal, where the Philippines posts a small cadre of its marines on a now-derelict Philippine Navy ship, the Sierra Madre.
In December 2023, a Philippine boat and a Chinese ship collided near a contested reef. The Philippines accused China of causing “severe damage†to the engine of one boat after using a water cannon. Similarly, in January 2024, the Congressional Research Service reported that China had increased pressure on the Philippines to abandon one of its outposts in the Spratly Islands and attempted to deny Philippine vessels access to parts of its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) that China claims as its own territory.
These recent episodes along with many others signify the risks of miscalculation, confrontation, and conflict among involved parties, as well as their respective allies and partners.
Coercive Measures and Grey Zone Tactics
In the South China Sea, China has employed an array of coercive measures and grey zone tactics against the Philippines, shaping the dynamics of their bilateral relations. Economic pressure emerges as a prominent tool, with China leveraging its economic influence to mold Philippine foreign policy. This includes offering loans, investments, and infrastructure projects through the Belt and Road Initiative, while simultaneously wielding trade sanctions, restrictions, and boycotts on Philippine exports like bananas, pineapples, and nickel. Beijing has even gone so far as to threaten the suspension of tourism and remittances from Chinese nationals and workers in the Philippines if compliance with its demands is not met.
Cyberattacks have become another facet of China’s strategy, targeting Philippine government agencies, media outlets, and civil society organizations. These attacks involve hacking, defacement, data theft from websites, and distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks aiming to disrupt online operations.
Furthermore, China has engaged in disinformation campaigns, disseminating false or misleading information on social media platforms to shape public opinion within the Philippines. Pro-China narratives, undermining Philippine sovereignty, and sowing division among Filipinos are key objectives. China utilizes state media, diplomatic channels, and paid trolls to propagate its propaganda and influence Philippine media and politics.
In response to these coercive measures, the Philippines has undertaken several countermeasures. Economic diversification efforts seek to reduce dependence on China, fostering expanded trade and investment ties with the United States, Japan, Australia, and the European Union. Active participation in regional economic initiatives, including the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), aims to enhance market access and competitiveness.
On the cybersecurity front, the Philippines has fortified its capabilities and awareness by implementing the National Cybersecurity Plan 2022, establishing the National Computer Emergency Response Team, and creating the Cybercrime Investigation and Coordination Center. Collaborative partnerships with the United States, Japan, Australia, and Singapore involve technical assistance, training, and equipment to bolster cybersecurity defenses.
Addressing disinformation, the Philippines has developed mechanisms to detect and counter false narratives, including fact-checking platforms, media literacy programs, and civic education campaigns. Collaborative efforts with the United States, the United Kingdom, and Taiwan involve sharing best practices and resources for combating disinformation.
These strategic responses underscore the Philippines’ commitment to safeguarding its sovereignty and national interests in the face of coercive measures, highlighting the importance of multifaceted and collaborative approaches to address the complex challenges posed by grey zone tactics employed by China.
Unforeseen Events and Regional Instability
The strategic expanse of the South China Sea remains ensnared in territorial and maritime disputes, a focal point for contention among China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and Taiwan. The Philippines, deeply vested in this geopolitical struggle, faces the looming specter of broader regional conflicts that could potentially jeopardize its security, sovereignty, and overall interests.
Numerous incidents and standoffs have unfolded between the Philippines and China over contested features, including the Scarborough Shoal, the Second Thomas Shoal, and the Whitsun Reef. In response, the Philippines has vehemently protested China’s actions, citing violations of its rights and the 2016 arbitral ruling that favored the Philippines while dismissing China’s claims.
Challenges persist from other claimants, notably Vietnam and Malaysia, over overlapping claims in the Spratly Islands. In an effort to address these disputes, the Philippines has pursued diplomatic avenues, signing a memorandum of understanding with Vietnam in 2019 for fisheries cooperation and engaging in joint patrols with Malaysia in 2020.
To counterbalance China’s escalating influence and assertiveness in the South China Sea, the Philippines has strategically leveraged its alliance and partnerships, particularly with the United States, Japan, and Australia. Simultaneously, the Philippines and Japan have fortified their strategic partnership, particularly in maritime security, defense technology, and economic cooperation. Additionally, a status of visiting forces agreement with Australia enables joint military exercises and training.
Participation in multilateral forums has been a cornerstone of the Philippines’ regional approach. Active engagement in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Quad reflects its commitment to fostering stability and cooperation in the South China Sea.
Limits and Considerations
Navigating the territorial disputes in the South China Sea requires a balanced approach. Military power, despite being a formidable tool, is not a viable option for resolving these disputes. Such a course of action would run afoul of the UN Charter and international law. Additionally, military actions pose the risk of escalating the conflict and drawing in major powers like the United States, Japan, and Australia into the fray, each with their own security interests in the region.
In contrast, the solution lies in seeking peaceful and diplomatic solutions, aligning with the principles of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This legal framework delineates the rights and obligations of states concerning maritime zones, dispute resolution, and environmental protection. The promotion of cooperation, conservation, and equitable use of marine resources and the environment is integral to fostering stability.
A pivotal initiative in pursuit of a peaceful resolution is the negotiation of a Code of Conduct (COC) between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and China. This framework aims to prevent conflicts and manage disputes by incorporating UNCLOS principles and including confidence-building measures, preventive diplomacy, and dispute settlement mechanisms.
The potential costs of prolonged tensions in the South China Sea are staggering, encompassing severe economic, social, and human ramifications for the region and beyond. A study by the University of Virginia states that a military conflict could force a substantial diversion of shipping routes, resulting in significant economic losses and trade disruptions. Countries most exposed to economic loss are already allocating substantial resources to their militaries, setting the stage for a rapid arms race.
Beyond the economic fallout, the South China Sea represents a diverse marine ecosystem critical for the livelihoods and food security of millions. Threats such as overfishing, pollution, climate change, and militarization already imperil the region’s biodiversity and productivity.
In essence, the path forward must navigate these complexities to ensure regional stability, environmental sustainability, and the well-being of the people in the region.
Conclusion
The Philippines faces complex challenges in defending itself against China’s assertive claims in the South China Sea. The nation’s strengths and weaknesses, spanning military preparedness, diplomatic engagement, and regional cooperation, highlight the need for a comprehensive approach. As the region grapples with geopolitical challenges, the Philippines stands poised to face the challenges in the South China Sea.
