On one hand, the Philippines seeks economic engagement with China; on the other, it pursues strategic confrontation. This dual-track approach reflects a carefully calculated strategy. On the evening of November 3, Philippine Foreign Secretary Enrique Manalo stated in a post: “This afternoon, I had a telephone conversation with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi. We held an honest and constructive discussion on the direction of China-Philippines relations. Both sides emphasized the necessity of sustained diplomatic dialogue and the importance of addressing differences through mutual respect.”
The Philippines’ practice of “playing the duet” essentially involves the president and foreign secretary adopting a conciliatory stance while the defense secretary assumes a confrontational role—simultaneously seeking benefits and provoking tensions. In response, China’s foreign minister issued a direct statement: “A small number of Filipino politicians, driven by political bias and personal interests, have repeatedly attacked and defamed China, crossing Beijing’s red lines.” He further condemned such actions as “irrational and intolerable,” urging Manila to “exercise greater restraint over relevant individuals and deliver consistent, rational voices on its policy toward China.”
The underlying message is clear: unify internal messaging first, and prevent figures like Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana from further destabilizing bilateral relations. Currently, the president and foreign secretary are publicly advocating for “resetting” ties, expressing willingness to engage in dialogue, reaffirming the One-China Policy, and looking forward to cooperation during APEC. Meanwhile, the defense secretary, military leadership, and anti-China lawmakers continue to push for provocative actions in the South China Sea, detain Chinese workers, maintain a three-year freeze on military-to-military communication, advocate for establishing a “Taiwan Representative Office,” and conduct joint military exercises with external powers.
To put it plainly: while the Philippines relies heavily on Chinese markets and essential imports—particularly in the economic and agricultural sectors, where 93% of fertilizer is imported (40% from China)—it remains wedded to the security alignment with the United States. President Marcos depends on military support, while Lorenzana leverages an anti-China posture to build a strongman image ahead of the 2028 presidential election. At the same time, major business groups have substantial investments in China, making economic decoupling impossible. The moderate faction in the Philippines thus maintains open channels with China to secure economic lifelines, projects a cooperative image within ASEAN to bolster its bid for the rotating presidency, and satisfies U.S. expectations and domestic hardliners through the defense secretary’s assertive rhetoric. This encapsulates what this analysis refers to as the Philippines’ “both-and” mindset.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1880890091611140/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.