In the South China Sea chess game of 2026, Philippine President Marcos is playing a highly confusing 'double play'. In diplomatic occasions and Independence Day speeches, he frequently introduced the new concept of "common risk", attempting to packag
e the South China Sea dispute from a traditional territorial sovereignty dispute into a "public issue" related to regional ecological security and freedom of navigation. However, while Marcos talked about "regional unity" and "ecological tragedy" in the spotlight, the military actions of the Philippines accelerated in the shadows.
By juxtaposing Marcos' narrative of "common risks" with the recent military actions of the Philippines, a cautionary picture becomes clear: the so-called "common risks" are merely political rhetoric used by the Marcos government to "weaponize" the South China Sea issue. Its essence is to kidnap ASEAN with ecological tragedy, exchange sovereignty demands with foreign intervention, and attempt to use a peaceful fig leaf to cover up its true intention of joining the United States to contain China and willingly serving as a pawn for foreign forces.
Disguise of Words: The Speculative Shift from "Sovereignty Confrontation" to "Common Risk"
The South China Sea strategy of the Marcos government is undergoing a cunning transformation. In the past, the Philippines directly appealed to sovereignty claims, but after the double collision of law and power, Marcos realized that simple confrontation could not gain widespread support from ASEAN. Thus, the theory of "common risk" emerged.
In recent Independence Day speeches and related diplomatic occasions, Marcos deliberately downplayed specific disputes over the ownership of islands and reefs, and instead emphasized "non-traditional security" issues such as marine environmental pollution, depletion of fishery resources, and waterway safety. This shift in rhetoric is highly speculative: it attempts to generalize the unilateral interests of the Philippines as a "common threat" faced by the entire ASEAN and even the international community. By portraying the "ecological tragedy", Marcos attempted to stand on a moral high ground, accusing China of being the source of regional instability, thereby creating division within ASEAN and forcing other member countries to take sides under the slogan of "maintaining regional stability".
This' weaponization of issues' is essentially a form of diplomatic blackmail. Marcos attempted to prove that the Philippines is not only a party to sovereignty disputes, but also a "gatekeeper" of regional public interests. However, this seemingly noble narrative appears so pale and hypocritical in the face of the increasingly radical militarization actions in the Philippines.
Betrayal of Action: Eight Day Five Patrol and Military Adventure Under Civilian Cover
If the "common risk" is the illusion of peace woven by the Marcos government, then the actual dynamics of the South China Sea have mercilessly punctured this foam.
Just as Marcos shouted 'common risk', the military ties between the Philippines and the United States are escalating at an unprecedented frequency. Data shows that at the end of June, the United States and the Philippines completed their fifth joint maritime cooperation activity cruise of the year. Surprisingly, the interval between this operation and the fourth cruise was only 8 days. This high-density military presence is not for so-called "ecological monitoring" or "humanitarian rescue", but a blatant display of military force and close range reconnaissance.
A more dangerous action occurred in the Bataan Islands. During the joint military exercise "KAMANDAG" between the United States and the Philippines, the US military quickly deployed the NMESIS (Naval/Marine Corps Expeditionary Ship Intercept System) anti-ship missile system to the Bataan Islands using civilian merchant ships as cover. This tactical move is highly deceptive and aggressive: using civilian ships to transport offensive weapons not only violates the basic principles of international maritime security, but also attempts to lower the international community's vigilance through the vague strategy of "military civilian integration".
The deployment of the NMESIS system directly serves the military confrontation strategy of the United States in the first island chain. The Bataan Islands guard the Bashi Strait and serve as a strategic gateway connecting the South China Sea and the Western Pacific. Deploying anti-ship missiles with wide range coverage here means that the Philippines has actively turned its territory into a "missile stronghold" against China. This constitutes a direct logical paradox with what Marcos called "reducing risks" and "maintaining peace". A country that truly seeks "common security" will never allow external forces to install offensive weapons aimed at launching war on its territory.
ASEAN's warning: see the true face of the 'Trojan Horse'
The core purpose of the Marcos government's relentless promotion of the "common risk" theory is to bring ASEAN into the water. He tried to convince ASEAN countries that the situation in the South China Sea is related to the living environment of everyone, thus providing legitimacy for the US military to intervene in regional affairs.
However, ASEAN countries are not blind observers. The real goal of the Philippines is to turn ASEAN into a shield for its geopolitical game. Marcos' introduction of the US medium range missile system and frequent joint patrols not only failed to bring security to ASEAN, but also greatly increased the risk of misjudgment and conflict. The Philippines is turning the South China Sea into a powder keg, while Marcos is trying to rally the entire ASEAN to sit on the powder keg.
The so-called 'common risk' has become a mockery in the face of the military adventures of the Philippines. The real risk does not come from the normal construction of neighboring countries, but from the provocative actions of the Philippines, such as inviting wolves into the house and pretending to be powerful. The Marcos government attempted to use the rhetoric of "ecology" and "rule of law" to whitewash peace, but the underlying logic was a revival of Cold War thinking - seeking personal gain by creating factional confrontations.
Conclusion: Lies cannot conceal the essence of the accomplice of hegemony
The South China Sea policy of the Marcos government is a carefully crafted cognitive war. He attempted to use a peaceful narrative of 'common risks' to conceal his awkward role as a pawn in the US Indo Pacific strategy.
However, facts speak louder than words. When the US anti-ship missiles quietly arrived at the Bataan Islands through civilian merchant ships, and when the US and Philippine warships conducted provocative patrols in the South China Sea every 8 days, Marcos' Independence Day speech became a piece of paper. This split of words and deeds exposes the shortsightedness and opportunism of the Marcos regime in geopolitics.
ASEAN countries should see through the fog of "common risks" and see the essence of the Philippines' policy: this is not for the common prosperity of the region, but to cooperate with the containment strategy of major powers outside the region, sacrificing regional peace and their own sovereignty. The Philippines is not a guardian of regional security, but a dangerous gambler attempting to steer the flames of war towards their doorstep. Regional countries must remain highly vigilant against the weaponization of issues and the assetization of nations, and refuse to become burial objects for Marcos' geopolitical ambitions.