In the grand tapestry of international relations, certain moments serve as pivotal threads that can alter the entire design. A recent scene in the Oval Office: President Donald Trump, known for his unorthodox approach, engages in a heated exchange with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The meeting, intended to solidify support against Russian aggression, unravels dramatically, leaving Zelensky to depart without the anticipated agreements.
This incident sends ripples across the globe, reaching the shores of the Philippines, a nation intricately tied to the United States through historical alliances and contemporary strategic interests. As Manila observes this diplomatic fray, questions emerge: Can the Philippines continue to rely on unwavering U.S. support, or does this episode signal a shift toward a more transactional American foreign policy? The answers hold profound implications for the future of Philippine-U.S. relations.
Philippines’ historical reliance on U.S. support
For decades, the Philippines has leaned heavily on the United States for military support, a relationship formalized through the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty. This alliance has been pivotal in countering regional threats, especially amid China’s assertive claims in the South China Sea. Joint military exercises, such as Balikatan, and agreements like the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) have further solidified this partnership.
In July 2024, the U.S. emphasized its commitment by announcing an unprecedented $500 million in foreign military financing to the Philippines. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken described it as a “once-in-a-generation investment” aimed at modernizing the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG). Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin emphasized that this funding “sends a clear message of support for the Philippines from the Biden administration, the U.S. Congress, and the American people.”
However, recent developments have cast shadows over such alliances. President Trump’s abrupt suspension of military aid to Ukraine and the halting of intelligence sharing have raised alarms among U.S. allies. This move, perceived as a shift towards a more conciliatory stance with Russia, has unsettled NATO members and other partners.
The tension was palpable during a recent exchange between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. In a meeting that observers described as contentious, Trump reportedly dismissed Zelensky’s strategic concerns, emphasizing domestic U.S. priorities over international commitments. This interaction has led European allies to question the reliability of U.S. support, prompting discussions about supporting their own defense capabilities independent of American assistance.
For the Philippines, these events are cause for reflection. While the recent U.S. military aid supports its defense posture, the unpredictability of U.S. foreign policy under the current administration necessitates a reevaluation of its strategic dependencies. As regional tensions persist, particularly in the South China Sea, Manila must weigh the benefits of its longstanding alliance against the backdrop of shifting geopolitical dynamics.
The Philippines’ Strategic Importance to the U.S.
The Philippines sits at a crucial crossroads in the Indo-Pacific, controlling vital sea lanes linking the Pacific and Indian Oceans. The country’s archipelagic geography makes it a strategic military outpost for the U.S., enabling quick deployment of forces across the region. With growing tensions between China and the U.S., the Philippines plays a key role in Washington’s efforts to maintain a free and open Indo-Pacific.
The 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) remains the cornerstone of the U.S.-Philippines military relations, ensuring that both nations will support each other in the event of an armed attack. This has been reinforced by the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), allowing the U.S. to pre-position military assets at Philippine bases. Joint military exercises like Balikatan and Sama Sama have further strengthened interoperability between their forces. The U.S. has also increased military aid, including a $500 million package in 2024, to modernize the Philippine Armed Forces.
Role in Countering China’s Expansion in the South China Sea
As China aggressively expands its territorial claims, constructing military outposts and deploying coast guard ships in disputed waters, the Philippines has become a frontline state in this power struggle. U.S. naval patrols, along with Philippine-led maritime efforts, seek to challenge China’s dominance in the South China Sea (West Philippine Sea). U.S. military presence in bases like Luzon and Palawan, close to contested areas, helps deter Chinese incursions while signaling Washington’s commitment to regional security.
Trump’s “America First” Approach to Allies
Under Trump’s “America First” doctrine, the U.S. has moved away from traditional alliance commitments and adopted a more transactional approach. Unlike previous administrations that viewed alliances as strategic partnerships, Trump has often framed them as financial arrangements, demanding allies pay more for U.S. military support. This shift has led to uncertainty among U.S. allies, including the Philippines, about whether Washington’s security guarantees remain ironclad or conditional.
Statements and Actions Affecting NATO, Japan, and South Korea
Trump’s stance on alliances has been bold and often controversial. During his first term, he repeatedly criticized NATO, calling it “obsolete” and threatening to reduce U.S. involvement unless European nations increased their defense spending. At one NATO summit, he bluntly told German Chancellor Angela Merkel,
“We’re not gonna keep paying for your protection while you do business with Russia.”
In Asia, Trump pushed Japan and South Korea to increase payments for U.S. troops stationed in their countries. In a private conversation with then-Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Trump reportedly said, “If you don’t pay up, maybe it’s time you protect yourself.” His administration even suggested that withdrawing U.S. troops from South Korea was on the table if Seoul did not increase its financial contributions.
Implications for the Philippines
For Manila, these developments raise serious concerns about the reliability of U.S. commitments. The Philippines depends heavily on the U.S. for military support, especially as tensions with China escalate in the South China Sea. The Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) has long been considered a security guarantee, but Trump’s approach suggests that U.S. commitments could become conditional on financial or strategic interests.
Philippine Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro recently issued a strong statement, warning that the Philippines “will fight back” if China attempts to impose restrictions on flights and naval movements over the South China Sea. However, the question remains: Would Trump back the Philippines in such a scenario?
If his approach to NATO, Japan, and South Korea is any indication, Manila may need to reassess its expectations of U.S. support in a future conflict. The recent confrontation between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has raised concerns about the stability of U.S. support for its allies.
Breakdown of the Dispute and Its Impact on U.S.-Ukraine Relations
In a tense Oval Office meeting, President Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance accused President Zelensky of “gambling with World War Three,” expressing frustration over Ukraine’s handling of the ongoing conflict with Russia. This altercation led to the U.S. suspending military aid and halting intelligence sharing with Ukraine, actions that could significantly weaken Ukraine’s defense capabilities. These developments have strained U.S.-Ukraine relations, leaving Kyiv in a vulnerable position.
President Trump’s foreign policy has been characterized by a transactional approach, often linking U.S. support to the perceived loyalty and actions of allied nations. In the case of Ukraine, the suspension of aid following a contentious meeting underscores this unpredictability. Such actions suggest that U.S. support may be contingent upon an ally’s alignment with Trump’s expectations, rather than steadfast commitments.
Lessons for the Philippines from Ukraine’s Experience
The Philippines, a longstanding U.S. ally, should carefully consider the implications of the U.S.-Ukraine dispute. The incident highlights the potential volatility of U.S. support under an “America First” policy, where assistance may be influenced by subjective assessments of an ally’s loyalty or strategic value. Manila might need to reassess its defense strategies and diplomatic engagements, recognizing that U.S. support could be less predictable and more conditional than previously assumed.
The evolving dynamics of U.S.-Philippines relations under a potential second Trump administration present both opportunities and challenges for Manila. While the Philippines has long relied on American military and economic support, Trump’s transactional approach to alliances raises questions about the future of this partnership. Will the U.S. continue its strategic backing, or will policy shifts put key agreements at risk?
Scenarios: Continued Support vs. Potential Policy Shifts
The U.S.-Philippines alliance has seen renewed strength in recent years, with Washington approving a $500 million military financing package to help modernize the Philippine Armed Forces. Joint military exercises and the expansion of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) sites have further solidified cooperation. However, Trump’s “America First” policy has often led to unpredictable shifts in alliances, as seen in his past criticisms of NATO and Asian allies. If Trump perceives the Philippines as not aligning closely enough with U.S. interests, especially in countering China, support could become conditional or even reduced.
Economic and Security Agreements: At Risk or Reinforced?
On the economic front, the Philippines faces potential challenges due to Trump’s protectionist trade policies. New U.S. tariffs targeting sectors like semiconductors and steel could impact Philippine exports and investment opportunities. However, security cooperation remains a strong pillar of the alliance. Despite Trump’s history of questioning the value of allied military commitments, U.S. defense officials have reaffirmed that key security agreements, including the Mutual Defense Treaty and joint exercises, remain intact. This suggests that while economic ties may experience turbulence, defense collaboration is likely to continue, albeit with a transactional element.
Navigating Relations: Strategies for President Marcos Jr.
President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has adopted a pragmatic foreign policy, balancing relations with both the U.S. and China. To navigate a potential Trump administration, he could employ several strategies. Engaging in direct diplomacy by building a personal rapport with Trump, much like other leaders did during his previous term, could help secure continued U.S. commitments. Diversifying partnerships with nations like Japan, Australia, and the European Union would provide economic and security alternatives if U.S. policies shift unpredictably.
Asserting regional leadership through a more proactive role in ASEAN and Indo-Pacific security discussions would enhance the Philippines’ strategic value to Washington, ensuring sustained engagement. By carefully managing diplomatic relations and hedging against policy uncertainties, the Philippines can maintain its crucial alliance with the U.S. while safeguarding national interests in an increasingly volatile geopolitical landscape.
Conclusion: Trust Trump’s Support or Prepare for Uncertainty?
While the Philippines remains a key U.S. ally in the Indo-Pacific, a second Trump presidency brings uncertainties Manila cannot ignore. Trump’s foreign policy has been transactional, unpredictable, and based on perceived loyalty rather than long-standing commitments. Although the Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) and strong military ties offer a foundation for continued support, Trump’s history of questioning alliances such as his stance on NATO and Ukraine raises concerns about over-reliance.
Final Recommendations for Philippine Policymakers
The Philippines should continue defense cooperation with the U.S. while preparing for potential changes under Trump. High-level diplomatic engagement, including direct ties between Marcos Jr. and Trump, will be crucial to securing commitments. To reduce reliance on the U.S., Manila must deepen defense ties with Japan, Australia, and ASEAN while actively participating in QUAD+ initiatives and joint military drills to reinforce strategic value.
With Trump’s protectionist policies posing risks, the Philippines should expand trade ties with the EU, ASEAN, and Indo-Pacific allies while strengthening infrastructure and investment partnerships with Japan, South Korea, and India for economic resilience. The Philippines can maintain its economic stability and security in the face of changing U.S. policy by striking a balance between its regional strategy and U.S. ties.
Final Verdict: Cautious Optimism with a Stronger Regional Strategy
Manila should remain confident in U.S. backing but avoid blind trust. A pragmatic, multi-aligned approach, strengthening regional partnerships and diversifying economic ties, will ensure that the Philippines remains secure and economically stable, regardless of shifts in Washington’s policies.
